The Vaccine Discussion Thread

[gotomu212]

Where did you get that data because it is not true.

It was reported in dozens of news outlets. Here’s a report from the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation. Table on page 6 lists the causes of death numbers.
http://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/Projects/COVID/briefing_US_20201204.pdf

 

[gotomu212]

I haven't seen any recent stats on excess deaths. If deaths "from COVID" are similar to numbers from "deaths with COVID," we should be able to observe large numbers of excess deaths.

How recent are you looking for? The CDC published a report a little over a month again on 10/23 showing 200k excess deaths attributed to CoVid for the year thus far (out of almost 300k excess deaths as of October). Since that report, the death rate of CoVid has continued to increase so I don’t think the last month is going to show a sudden slump in excess death data.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6942e2.htm

 

[jane01jp]

How recent are you looking for? The CDC published a report a little over a month again on 10/23 showing 200k excess deaths attributed to CoVid for the year thus far (out of almost 300k excess deaths as of October). Since that report, the death rate of CoVid has continued to increase so I don’t think the last month is going to show a sudden slump in excess death data.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6942e2.htm

Thanks. I was just curious, even as deaths attributed to COVID 19 are on the increase, if deaths from some other causes might be decreasing.

 

[Intr3pid]

There is nothing wrong with giving people hope and being optimistic. But, I am not looking for rose-colored opinions, as much as smarter messaging and more realistic goals of when we can return to "normal." Messaging that we may never return to normal will only result in less compliance now. And setting goals that aren't realistically attainable (in some reasonable time frame) will do the same.

The virus is dangerous and deadly to many, but lockdowns and extreme measures are devastating too, both in lives lost, emotional damage, and economic damage - which isn't only about money - economic damages costs lives, quality of life, and health. Experts need to understand that policy decisions must account for more than the effects of one virus. No policy decision should ever be made in a vacuum. There is always risk and compromise in well-thought-out policy. Always. Without exception. Experts sounds like they want nearly 100% elimination of risk before life continues, and that is neither realistic nor productive.

I know many here seem perfectly happy with the isolation. Or at least not too concerned about it. To each there own. But many are suffering severely for it, including children (and particularly socioeconomically disadvantaged children). We have had posts here of those in the travel industry whose careers are devastated and who can't pay their bills. Millions in the hospitality industry around the globe are paying the price for our safety. Hundreds of thousands aren't getting proper medical care due to the virus. We owe it to all of them to find a balance for when we can exit this situation and make the messaging clear on when that is likely to be, instead of always saying, "not so fast..."

I understand your frustration with a bleak situation - and I personally am frustrated too - probably more so. But, that's not going to change the reality around us. We are not seeing 3,000 people die of emotional and economic damage - or of a deterioration in quality of life. You can come out of a depression and recover from the emotional toil. Death unfortunately is permanent.

We speak of the balance between economic freedom and public health - between lockdowns and jobs. Well, in the US, there hasn't been a true lockdown at any time in this pandemic. We had (and now have again) a few states taking matters in their own hands, but nationally it's been a free-for-all. We have been - so to speak - throwing bandages at a disease We are also quick to demonize anyone wanting to take a harder stance.

And there is nothing to show for it. This is the third wave - the largest yet. Nearly 3,000 daily deaths are at hand. The GDP and job numbers are in the toilet. Careers, as you note, are getting decimated. Politicians are fighting. And there is little hope until a mass vaccination - by when expect a few more industries to disappear and a few hundred thousand more graves to appear. Why is the simple truth lost on so many? You cannot have an economic recovery until this virus is gone. You want jobs? Show this virus the door first.

Messaging of hope is great. It hasn't worked so far this year, but maybe third time is the charm! The right approach - the only approach short of a mass vaccination - is to lock down everything for a month and pay everyone a check to stay at home. Do it nationally - with aggressive testing and contact tracing. While there is no evidence of a whilly whally, half-hearted containment path to recovery, there is plenty of evidence why a decisive approach works. You avert a public health crisis BECAUSE OF WHICH your economy gets a jump start. Here are three examples.

The epicenter:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/business/china-economy-covid.html
Well, give me an eye roll - I know. How about South Korea?
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/1...conomic-impact-recession-south-korea-success/
If you insist on 'G-7', check out Japan, which has less than 2,500 total COVID deaths to show to date.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54955484
To be clear, no one is out of the woods yet. The virus is still very much raging. What we do see is that if you are able to contain this virus, you begin to have your economic freedom back. These two problems are intertwined - you can't solve one without solving the other.

 

[jane01jp]

Interesting info from the CDC:

 

[jane01jp]

I understand your frustration with a bleak situation - and I personally am frustrated too - probably more so. But, that's not going to change the reality around us. We are not seeing 3,000 people die of emotional and economic damage - or of a deterioration in quality of life. You can come out of a depression and recover from the emotional toil. Death unfortunately is permanent.

We speak of the balance between economic freedom and public health - between lockdowns and jobs. Well, in the US, there hasn't been a true lockdown at any time in this pandemic. We had (and now have again) a few states taking matters in their own hands, but nationally it's been a free-for-all. We have been - so to speak - throwing bandages at a disease We are also quick to demonize anyone wanting to take a harder stance.

And there is nothing to show for it. This is the third wave - the largest yet. Nearly 3,000 daily deaths are at hand. The GDP and job numbers are in the toilet. Careers, as you note, are getting decimated. Politicians are fighting. And there is little hope until a mass vaccination - by when expect a few more industries to disappear and a few hundred thousand more graves to appear. Why is the simple truth lost on so many? You cannot have an economic recovery until this virus is gone. You want jobs? Show this virus the door first.

Messaging of hope is great. It hasn't worked so far this year, but maybe third time is the charm! The right approach - the only approach short of a mass vaccination - is to lock down everything for a month and pay everyone a check to stay at home. Do it nationally - with aggressive testing and contact tracing. While there is no evidence of a whilly whally, half-hearted containment path to recovery, there is plenty of evidence why a decisive approach works. You avert a public health crisis BECAUSE OF WHICH your economy gets a jump start. Here are three examples.

The epicenter:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/business/china-economy-covid.html
Well, give me an eye roll - I know. How about South Korea?
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/1...conomic-impact-recession-south-korea-success/
If you insist on 'G-7', check out Japan, which has less than 2,500 total COVID deaths to show to date.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54955484
To be clear, no one is out of the woods yet. The virus is still very much raging. What we do see is that if you are able to contain this virus, you begin to have your economic freedom back. These two problems are intertwined - you can't solve one without solving the other.

Check out Europe. Many of their nations did strict lockdowns, yet have current deaths per capita even greater than those in the US. It's a small world after all...

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Interesting info from the CDC:

View attachment 542227

That's because that is long term observational study.

It is known that having COVID-19 has impacts on male fertility in the short term. It is unknown the long-term impacts of having COVID-19 on much of anything, especially when the disease hits pre-puberty.

There is a lot of stuff that science cannot model and requires long term observation.

 

[jane01jp]

That's because that is long term observational study.

It is known that having COVID-19 has impacts on male fertility in the short term. It is unknown the long-term impacts of having COVID-19 on much of anything, especially when the disease hits pre-puberty.

There is a lot of stuff that science cannot model and requires long term observation.

Thanks for the additional color. It would seem that whatever long-term vaccine risks are, if any, they could not be reversed once the shot is in your veins.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Thanks for the additional color. It would seem that whatever long-term vaccine risks are, if any, they could not be reversed once the shot is in your veins.

but neither could being dead.

HPV is an interesting case where it was thought it didn't really do much. We now have a vaccine because it was found... oops, super high correlation with 6 kinds of cancers that present in both men and women. The science developed over decades, because cancer wasn't a symptom of HPV, it was a long term impact.

https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/cancer.html
So for those debating the vaccine, it really is a case where they have to decide if the potential unknown long term negatives of a vaccine are more or less frightening than the potential unknown immediate term plus unknown long term impacts of having COVID-19. And I call the immediate term "unknown" because there are no real predictors of who gets it bad and who walks, as some of the long-haulers can testify. One of my friends is a long-hauler, and she used to bike 15 miles each day to work all year long, including in Minnesota winter. Her health factors and age are not among the flags for higher risk. Yet, here she is, 6 months later, monitoring heart damage and getting winded on stairs.

 

[jane01jp]

but neither could being dead.

Very true! That's why it is comforting to know that I have eternal life.

 

[ruadisneyfan2]

Interesting info from the CDC:

View attachment 542227

This is because it hasn't been proven by research either way. In medical field, nothing is assumed; it must be proven. They can only state whether it does or doesn't impair fertility after they do a research study that attempts to prove the researcher's theory. There is not even a correlation as of yet to impaired fertility, let alone a suspicion that the vaccine may have caused it. All medicines have side effects, even a simple aspirin, and they list the minor common ones (stomach upset), and the less common severe ones (anaphylaxis).

The label also typically includes what the medicine is taken for, how to take it, whether it's safe to take during pregnancy (another set of categories for pregnancy), whether it's excreted in breast milk, what to do in case of overdose, max dosage in a 24-hour period.

Please don't use this label statement to stir up drama. This type of medication labeling is nothing new. In your circled example, it is unknown because it's new. Feel free to wait until all of those aspects have been studied if you wish. I don't believe they are trying to hide anything. They are completely up front admitting that they don't even know how long the immunity lasts and when people will need a booster. People are free to wait for those details to be proven as well.
Details such as this are typically studied before a medication is FDA approved but no other illness in our lifetime (that includes the elderly) has had such a profound effect on the world as Covid and this is why they are asking for Emergency Approval Use.


Even after a medication is approved and being used for years, FDA approval can be revoked. Once reports start showing connections of undesirable effects to a medication, they can revoke the approval or sometimes add a black box warning (strong warning message to the public and/or prescribing doctor). I used to take Seldane for my allergies and it worked WONDERFULLY but when taken along with other commonly prescribed medicines, it was causing serious heart problems. After being in use for 10 years, it was banned in the US. My point is, medications are always being studied, even long after being FDA approved. Just because a drug is approved, doesn't mean they would ignore it.

 

[ruadisneyfan2]

Thanks for the additional color. It would seem that whatever long-term vaccine risks are, if any, they could not be reversed once the shot is in your veins.

The same applies for having an xray of your abdomen or pelvis. Once the radiation is given, it cannot be returned.

If the benefit outweighs the risk, you would do it. If there is little benefit, then the risk is not worthwhile. This is why we don't do mammograms on young ladies <30. Their breast tissue is so dense that it doesn't give the radiologist a lot of information, there is a lesser benefit.
Here is another example regarding urgency. If you are trying to find out if your daughter has scoliosis and might possibly need a brace or even rods surgically implanted in her spine, you consider whether it's worth her having a full spine xray and what are the effects of having her breasts and ovaries exposed, possibly multiple times: pre-op/planning, intra-op, several post-op follow up exams. This is generally elective and you have time to think about it and ask questions to your doctor or even speak with the radiation physicist to help you decide. You could also compare the risk of doing nothing and how will her untreated scoliosis affect her future health and quality of life.

If she comes in through our trauma center after being hit by a car while crossing the road, you don't sit there saying stop all that radiation. You just say omg, please save my child's life.

How urgent do you feel with the current state of covid? Some people are completely not worried, some are concerned, and some are petrified and haven't left their home since March. For anything.
Only you can decide if you feel it's worth having the vaccine during this emergency approval use time, maybe later after everyone else does, or you want no parts of it, ever. AFAIK, no one is being forced to have this vaccine.

 

[jane01jp]

This is because it hasn't been proven by research either way. In medical field, nothing is assumed; it must be proven. They can only state whether it does or doesn't impair fertility after they do a research study that attempts to prove the researcher's theory. There is not even a correlation as of yet to impaired fertility, let alone a suspicion that the vaccine may have caused it. All medicines have side effects, even a simple aspirin, and they list the minor common ones (stomach upset), and the less common severe ones (anaphylaxis).

The label also typically includes what the medicine is taken for, how to take it, whether it's safe to take during pregnancy (another set of categories for pregnancy), whether it's excreted in breast milk, what to do in case of overdose, max dosage in a 24-hour period.

Please don't use this label statement to stir up drama. This type of medication labeling is nothing new. In your circled example, it is unknown because it's new. Feel free to wait until all of those aspects have been studied if you wish. I don't believe they are trying to hide anything. They are completely up front admitting that they don't even know how long the immunity lasts and when people will need a booster. People are free to wait for those details to be proven as well.
Details such as this are typically studied before a medication is FDA approved but no other illness in our lifetime (that includes the elderly) has had such a profound effect on the world as Covid and this is why they are asking for Emergency Approval Use.


Even after a medication is approved and being used for years, FDA approval can be revoked. Once reports start showing connections of undesirable effects to a medication, they can revoke the approval or sometimes add a black box warning (strong warning message to the public and/or prescribing doctor). I used to take Seldane for my allergies and it worked WONDERFULLY but when taken along with other commonly prescribed medicines, it was causing serious heart problems. After being in use for 10 years, it was banned in the US. My point is, medications are always being studied, even long after being FDA approved. Just because a drug is approved, doesn't mean they would ignore it.

The label is theirs, not mine. I made no editorial. If the information is not germane to one's decision about the vaccine, they can choose to ignore it.

 

[ruadisneyfan2]

The label is theirs, not mine. I made no editorial. If the information is not germane to one's decision about the vaccine, they can choose to ignore it.

I understand. I was referring to the red circle around that one paragraph.

 

[DCLDVC1]

Interesting info from the CDC:

View attachment 542227

Way too many "unknowns" right now.

 

[jane01jp]

I understand. I was referring to the red circle around that one paragraph.

The red circle came from someone who passed it along to me.

 

[ruadisneyfan2]

Agreed. But the quote provided didn't really say that. It just said, "nope, other people can still get sick." My point is the messaging has been terrible from the start and continues to be so. Instead of focusing on the end game, we have been strung along and even told this is "the new normal." That is a terrible way to sell compliance.
...

Consider the source. This isn't how an MD would answer the same question. This is how the media answers it. Their 'science reporter', as if that means something to us. I know I'm nitpicking but it's the tone and attitude of the answer. A doctor would have a more diplomatic approach. A "let's be patient and give every one who wants it a chance to get their shot too" kind of tone. Not that snarky "Nope. You can still get other people sick." That's really a jerk of kind of answer. They could remind people that it's common with some well-established vaccines to need more than one dose for full immunity. The Hepatitis B vaccine is 3 doses and the 3rd one is 6 months after the first one. At least this is better than that, no? Needing 2 doses a month apart and allowing your immune system some time to produce antibodies is not a far fetched idea, widely accepted in the medical world. Humans are not computers; results are not instant. I wish journalists and reporters would just state the facts without allowing their own opinion to interfere with it.

One thing I've learned over the past year, I don't get medical advice from media/politicians and don't ask political advice from my physician.

 

[jane01jp]

Way too many "unknowns" right now.

Agree.

 

[Intr3pid]

Check out Europe. Many of their nations did strict lockdowns, yet have current deaths per capita even greater than those in the US. It's a small world after all...

Italy is the main example, but their higher death rates are linked to a number of factors, including a lack of early mobilization and availability of resources. A more appropriate comparison in the US would be with the state of NY.

 

[jane01jp]

Italy is the main example, but their higher death rates are linked to a number of factors, including a lack of early mobilization and availability of resources. A more appropriate comparison in the US would be with the state of NY.

Italy is the main example, but their higher death rates are linked to a number of factors, including a lack of early mobilization and availability of resources. A more appropriate comparison in the US would be with the state of NY.

I'm not sure I agree. If you take recent death rates for the US and compare them to Europe, they are similar. For the week ended December 5, the comparisons are as follows:

US - 15,550 deaths/331.7 million population = 4.69 deaths/million population

Italy - 5,151 deaths/60.4 million population = 8.52 deaths/million population
Austria - 739 deaths/9.0 million population = 8.19 deaths/million population
Belgium - 803 deaths/11.6 million population = 6.92 deaths/million population
UK - 2,984 deaths/68.0 million population = 4.39 deaths/million population
France - 2,751 deaths/65.3 million population = 4.21 deaths/million population
Switzerland - 703 deaths/17.1 million population = 4.10 deaths/million population
Germany - 2,598 deaths/11.6 million population = 3.10 deaths/million population
Netherlands - 336 deaths/17.1 million population = 1.96 deaths/million population
Aggregate for the above 8 nations - 16,065 deaths/332.6 million population = 4.83 deaths/million

So, early mobilization issues in Italy do not explain the current comparisons.