Sign in to follow this  
Jules

Covid surge still a mystery

Recommended Posts

DeSoto Covid surge still a mystery

The cause of a sudden rise of over 200 coronavirus cases in DeSoto County on Nov. 18 is a mystery that county health officials have yet to solve.  The alarming infection numbers were followed Sunday with 51 new cases, or 430 for a seven-day period.

COVID-19 hospitalizations continued to rise in DeSoto County; on Monday, 18 patients were hospitalized for primary diagnosis of COVID-19 at DeSoto Memorial Hospital, a spokesperson confirmed.

“We’re not sure where it is coming from,” Jeff Tambasco with DeSoto County Emergency Management said in an interview Tuesday.

Schools would seem to be a source and cases are increasing among them, with 15 cases reported from four of the county’s six public schools. That count included six infections reported at DeSoto Middle School.

But Tambasco said there is “no indication the spread is coming from the schools.”

Tambasco was reluctant to call the recent increases, including the Nov. 18 report of around 225 new cases, a “spike.” He acknowledged that the Nov. 18 tally came in about 200 cases above DeSoto numbers reported in recent weeks.

 

Talk about denial...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Just asking but what are you saying about "denial"?

  1. DeSoto county is in Florida.  Florida has all but ignored medical advice regarding slowing the spread of COVID.
  2. The paper cited an increase in COVID cases in the local schools.  "Tambasco said there is “no indication the spread is coming from the schools.”
  3. There was a sudden spike of over 200 COVID cases. " Tambasco was reluctant to call the recent increases, including the Nov. 18 report of around 225 new cases, a 'spike.'”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Jules said:
  1. DeSoto county is in Florida.  Florida has all but ignored medical advice regarding slowing the spread of COVID.
  2. The paper cited an increase in COVID cases in the local schools.  "Tambasco said there is “no indication the spread is coming from the schools.”
  3. There was a sudden spike of over 200 COVID cases. " Tambasco was reluctant to call the recent increases, including the Nov. 18 report of around 225 new cases, a 'spike.'”

Most "leaders" suck at maths. Exponential is beyond them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only someone, anyone had warned us of this happening in the fall.  This has been an advert for

redirect-95.png?lossy=1&strip=1&webp=1

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the Trumpdamaged CDC shows some understanding--even as the predictions they show are obviously flattening the actual trend rather magically

image.thumb.png.37b4bbc8122555fab1b160eeb4d26f98.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Jules said:

DeSoto Covid surge still a mystery

The cause of a sudden rise of over 200 coronavirus cases in DeSoto County on Nov. 18 is a mystery that county health officials have yet to solve.  The alarming infection numbers were followed Sunday with 51 new cases, or 430 for a seven-day period.

COVID-19 hospitalizations continued to rise in DeSoto County; on Monday, 18 patients were hospitalized for primary diagnosis of COVID-19 at DeSoto Memorial Hospital, a spokesperson confirmed.

“We’re not sure where it is coming from,” Jeff Tambasco with DeSoto County Emergency Management said in an interview Tuesday.

Schools would seem to be a source and cases are increasing among them, with 15 cases reported from four of the county’s six public schools. That count included six infections reported at DeSoto Middle School.

But Tambasco said there is “no indication the spread is coming from the schools.”

Tambasco was reluctant to call the recent increases, including the Nov. 18 report of around 225 new cases, a “spike.” He acknowledged that the Nov. 18 tally came in about 200 cases above DeSoto numbers reported in recent weeks.

 

Talk about denial...

Only 430 new cases in a week?  That sounds like fantastic progress!  Oh, nevermind. That’s some other county. My little county of a hundred thousand people maintains at least 2600 active cases as the norm. We talk about it all the time at the bar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2020 at 11:31 AM, Jules said:

DeSoto Covid surge still a mystery

The cause of a sudden rise of over 200 coronavirus cases in DeSoto County on Nov. 18 is a mystery that county health officials have yet to solve.  The alarming infection numbers were followed Sunday with 51 new cases, or 430 for a seven-day period.

COVID-19 hospitalizations continued to rise in DeSoto County; on Monday, 18 patients were hospitalized for primary diagnosis of COVID-19 at DeSoto Memorial Hospital, a spokesperson confirmed.

“We’re not sure where it is coming from,” Jeff Tambasco with DeSoto County Emergency Management said in an interview Tuesday.

Schools would seem to be a source and cases are increasing among them, with 15 cases reported from four of the county’s six public schools. That count included six infections reported at DeSoto Middle School.

But Tambasco said there is “no indication the spread is coming from the schools.”

Tambasco was reluctant to call the recent increases, including the Nov. 18 report of around 225 new cases, a “spike.” He acknowledged that the Nov. 18 tally came in about 200 cases above DeSoto numbers reported in recent weeks.

 

Talk about denial...

What a lot of people don't know about denial is the hippos kill a lot more people than the crocs do.  

 

 Oh wait...nevermind. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mark K said:

What a lot of people don't know about denial is the hippos kill a lot more people than the crocs do.  

 

 Oh wait...nevermind. 

Denial  started at Victoria but ended up with Alexandria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, slug zitski said:

Is the data in this  recent Johns Hopkins study of total  US mortality / Covid deaths correct ? 

https://www.aier.org/article/new-study-highlights-serious-accounting-error-regarding-covid-deaths/

 

 

" the article and video discussed below have been pulled by Johns Hopkins Newsletter. You can read the announcement here. An additional explanation is here. "

 https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19

"... Briand was quoted in the article as saying, “All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers.” This claim is incorrect ...

... This evidence does not disprove the severity of COVID-19...

... those with those underlying conditions are statistically more likely to be severely affected and die from the virus. ...

...Because of these inaccuracies and our failure to provide additional information about the effects of COVID-19, The News-Letter decided to retract this article. "

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, slug zitski said:

Is the data in this  recent Johns Hopkins study of total  US mortality / Covid deaths correct ? 

https://www.aier.org/article/new-study-highlights-serious-accounting-error-regarding-covid-deaths/

 

 

Slug!

Please read the News Letter statement aboit why they retracted.

The CDC currently counts 300k ezcess due CV19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, fastyacht said:

Slug!

Please read the News Letter statement aboit why they retracted.

The CDC currently counts 300k ezcess due CV19

I only have an iPhone , difficult to search and examine  data 

In the US , how many people have died of heart attacks this year,  compared to the past 5 year average ? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, fastyacht said:

The CDC currently counts 300k ezcess due CV19

That doesn't make sense.  The current total is 271k deaths by Covid-19 for the USA and they are not all excess deaths. 

The article may have been retracted but even so an interesting point is made that one would expect CVD deaths to either be the same or more but definitely not decrease.  Is the CVD data used in the analysis accurate?  If so what is the explanation for the decline?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2020 at 10:06 AM, d'ranger said:

If only someone, anyone had warned us of this happening in the fall.

Maybe they can blame it on the "Euro" virus...

The virus that causes COVID-19 is not the same strain as what first emerged from China. A new study shows it has changed slightly in a way that makes it more contagious to humans.

Compared to the original strain, people infected with the new strain -- called 614G -- have higher viral loads in their nose and throat, though they don’t seem to get any sicker. But they are much more contagious to others.

---------------------------------------------------SNIP----------------------------------------------------------

In the U.S., the original strain was imported from China and began circulating on the West Coast, while the new strain was imported from Europeans who were mainly traveling to New York and the rest of the East Coast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My SO's boss has never worn a mask.  He's never done social distancing.  He's called employees who wanted to create a mask policy "troublemakers." 

Today he sends his employees an email saying he tested positive for COVID.  And then he added, "I have no idea how that happened."

There must be another disease spreading around here - cluelessness.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2020 at 12:25 PM, Kate short for Bob said:

That doesn't make sense.  The current total is 271k deaths by Covid-19 for the USA and they are not all excess deaths. 

Unreported/undiagnosed cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

New study indicating that the virus may have been in the US as early as Dec. #919

https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-covid-december-2019-4984c25a-b4f1-44b3-a0ff-229142125d8f.html

Wifie and I are convinced our peer group got it Jan 11(Wifies Bday)  We had like 20 people bar hopping and ended up at a bar called One Up (bar that has real video games from the 80's) perfect incubator as little munchkins were in there all day before we got there.  Anyway, the next week she got something weird the kid was locked in the basement(on winter break) and about 40% of the people there reported some weird flu.  I got something  a couple days later that felt like I was gonna die(unlike the flu it did not succumb to over the counter meds) I was so achy, I could not leave the bed for a couple days.  So something was here in Jan... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the worst flu I've ever had back in February. But it was early. And my daughter got the flu a week later, confirmed by a rapid test. And despite all that, I still suspected so when I got access to a serum antibody test in August, I took it. And it came back negative. But antibodies don't last. So I still wonder but behave as though I never had it because that's the right thing to do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, IStream said:

I had the worst flu I've ever had back in February. But it was early. And my daughter got the flu a week later, confirmed by a rapid test. And despite all that, I still suspected so when I got access to a serum antibody test in August, I took it. And it came back negative. But antibodies don't last. So I still wonder but behave as though I never had it because that's the right thing to do.

Agreed.  Following CDC rules and being extra careful(I don't trust the orange one and it helps others) so mask it is.    Haven't been outside a 5 mi radius of the house since I got back from Phoenix late may.  Xmas is going to be ugly and the stupid thing is we prob could have slowed the spread by a couple of weeks.  A couple weeks means we may have had a mask less xmas, but no.....  The idiots prevailed again...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IStream said:

I had the worst flu I've ever had back in February. But it was early. And my daughter got the flu a week later, confirmed by a rapid test. And despite all that, I still suspected so when I got access to a serum antibody test in August, I took it. And it came back negative. But antibodies don't last. So I still wonder but behave as though I never had it because that's the right thing to do.

We think (Yale) but do not know that the antibodies last a reasonable amount of time

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the biggest known unknowns about this virus and the vaccines is how long the vaccines will be effective for and the level of resistance we build up from the antibodies.

I forecast that it will absorb a huge scientific effort as researchers discover whether those infected by the disease or inoculated by a vaccine build a long term immunity or will need regular vaccines.

There are large scientific and ethical challenges.  For sure we will be monitoring vaccinated apes/monkeys and subjecting them to periodic virus exposure. We will be monitoring the level of antibodies in vaccinated populations and infected populations.  However human populations have developed different levels of immunity to viruses in history, and the real litmus test will come as we study whether vaccinated populations become infected again.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EYESAILOR said:

One of the biggest known unknowns about this virus and the vaccines is how long the vaccines will be effective for and the level of resistance we build up from the antibodies.

I forecast that it will absorb a huge scientific effort as researchers discover whether those infected by the disease or inoculated by a vaccine build a long term immunity or will need regular vaccines.

There are large scientific and ethical challenges.  For sure we will be monitoring vaccinated apes/monkeys and subjecting them to periodic virus exposure. We will be monitoring the level of antibodies in vaccinated populations and infected populations.  However human populations have developed different levels of immunity to viruses in history, and the real litmus test will come as we study whether vaccinated populations become infected again.

Yep you're going to be getting regular booster shots for the rest of your life, the only question is will they be annual, every 2 years, 4 years, 10 years ....?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2020 at 12:25 PM, slug zitski said:

I only have an iPhone , difficult to search and examine  data 

Fair enough. In that case feel free to post any bullshit you like without checking whether it is true or not. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2020 at 12:25 PM, slug zitski said:

In the US , how many people have died of heart attacks this year,  compared to the past 5 year average ?

Have you tried asking Siri?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Fair enough. In that case feel free to post any bullshit you like without checking whether it is true or not. 

It never ceases to amaze me how many people can't seem to grasp that on the Intarwebs, anyone can claim to be Professor Ivor Bigdik from the University of Buttfuck, Idaho, and make up any quasi-scientific, pseudo-medical douchefuckery that they want, with absolutely no requirement for there to be one iota of truth involved. Just because you want to believe said bullcrap doesn't make it any more true, and even if you choose to delude yourself, please refrain from re-posting said codswallop, and especially from using said junk to try to justify, well, anything really

I am a reasonably well educated Weyalan, but when it comes to matters relating to a serious disease that can potentially kill me, I'll take guidance from evidence that has been peer reviewed and published in a reputable medical journal. The rest, not so much

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

We think (Yale) but do not know that the antibodies last a reasonable amount of time

My serum test was 6 months post-infection and I don't know the test's LOD, sensitivity, or specificity. It's possible I had antibodies that weren't detected or that I was a false negative. It's also possible that I had no detectable antibodies and am relying on memory cells for immune persistence. It's also possible I never had COVID at all. Regardless, I have to assume I'm still at risk and act accordingly. 

BTW, do you happen to know or work with Akiko Iwasaki (Yale immunology dept superstar)? I knew her in a past life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, IStream said:

My serum test was 6 months post-infection and I don't know the test's LOD, sensitivity, or specificity. It's possible I had antibodies that weren't detected or that I was a false negative. It's also possible that I had no detectable antibodies and am relying on memory cells for immune persistence. It's also possible I never had COVID at all. Regardless, I have to assume I'm still at risk and act accordingly. 

BTW, do you happen to know or work with Akiko Iwasaki (Yale immunology dept superstar)? I knew her in a past life.

Nope. I am on staff at a hospital in the Yale New Haven system but not at Yale itself, so receive briefings from them. I did my fellowship at Harvard, my sister at Yale.  My sister and I are from rural USA and were first in our family to go to college, so I remain pretty damn grateful for the opportunities that this country gave us, which is why I became a doctor so that I could give back.  My sister was a true hero during early stage of pandemic. She is my older sister and was in the front line risk for several weeks.   We are very different and at opposite ends of the political spectrum (no I wont say which is which) but her dedication and devotion to the surge of patients made me realize for the first time that political differences are irrelevant when working at the coal face of a pandemic. 

I think you are doing the right thing . Act as if you are not immune and get vaccinated when you can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate your and your sister's efforts.

Regarding the political differences, I agree that they're irrelevant if both parties are rational and don't let politics get in the way of the common good.

Unfortunately, that caveat doesn't apply to a large fraction of today's Republican party, which seems to equate selfishness with freedom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, SCARECROW said:

Yep you're going to be getting regular booster shots for the rest of your life, the only question is will they be annual, every 2 years, 4 years, 10 years ....?  

Possibly but I suspect unlikely.

If the vaccines only protect for a year and IF everyone is vaccinated within a year, then the virus should be eliminated due to a lack of hosts.  What throws a wrench into that logic though are those who refuse to be vaccinated.

Nevertheless even if the virus is still making the rounds a year later, there would just be another cycle of booster shots the following year(s) until the virus is eliminated

Now, if the vaccines are effective for 2 years or longer, then it tips the odds even more in favour of annual boosters not being required.

An analogous scenario would be the Smallpox vaccine, which only provides protection for 3-5 years - yet no one I know of has ever had a booster. https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/vaccine-basics/who-gets-vaccination.html

Smallpox boosters are only necessary within an outbreak or for an immune compromised individual.  And I believe the US has a sufficient stockpile of the Smallpox vaccine in the event of a bio-terror attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I had two smallpox vaccinations.  Once in the 60's for the normal childhood regime and again in the 70's when it was required for international travel.  Just sayin'.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I

2 hours ago, 12 metre said:

Possibly but I suspect unlikely.

If the vaccines only protect for a year and IF everyone is vaccinated within a year, then the virus should be eliminated due to a lack of hosts.  What throws a wrench into that logic though are those who refuse to be vaccinated.

Nevertheless even if the virus is still making the rounds a year later, there would just be another cycle of booster shots the following year(s) until the virus is eliminated

Now, if the vaccines are effective for 2 years or longer, then it tips the odds even more in favour of annual boosters not being required.

An analogous scenario would be the Smallpox vaccine, which only provides protection for 3-5 years - yet no one I know of has ever had a booster. https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/vaccine-basics/who-gets-vaccination.html

Smallpox boosters are only necessary within an outbreak or for an immune compromised individual.  And I believe the US has a sufficient stockpile of the Smallpox vaccine in the event of a bio-terror attack.

1. It will be logistically impossible to vaccinate everyone in a year. We just cannot make that many vaccine does. This is a global pandemic.

2. Many developing nations do not have the cold storage chain for mrna vaccines. Hopefully vaccines like JNJ will be succesful , but anyway you cut this, we are looking at at least a 3 year program to entirely eliminate the disease. Possibly longer because the disease is harder than Smallpox to detect and trace.

3. Don't worry, the good news is that vaccines and herd immunity will strand the virus in fewer and fewer locations . If we speculate that the vaccine lasts 3 years, then I think you will have at least one booster. If it lasts 1 year, I think we are going to be getting annual boosters for 4 years. Nobody wants this puppy  getting on the march again.

Do you think the manufacturers will be conservative or optimistic about length of immunity? If I was Moderna , I am going to be saying "Well it seems to last longer than  x years, but to be on the safe side, we recommend an periodic booster"  Which FDA official is going to risk being wrong?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EYESAILOR are you able to answer these questions:

1.  Given the speed with which these vaccines have been developed (5-6 months) and tested for 3-4 months is it fair to say that the level and length of immunity that they induce cannot have been accurately assessed yet?  I.e. there hasn't been long enough time.

2.  If the immunity induced from these vaccines turns out to be only short lived then will it not prolong the pandemic?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

EYESAILOR are you able to answer these questions:

1.  Given the speed with which these vaccines have been developed (5-6 months) and tested for 3-4 months is it fair to say that the level and length of immunity that they induce cannot have been accurately assessed yet?  I.e. there hasn't been long enough time.

2.  If the immunity induced from these vaccines turns out to be only short lived then will it not prolong the pandemic?

 

I'll jump in on this. I'm a bioengineer, not an MD, so EYE can correct any misstatements I make.

1. The level of immunity (both in terms of number of people who don't develop the disease and the decrease in severity in those who do) most certainly can be accurately assessed. However, you're correct that you can't accurately assess the durability of the immunity beyond the amount of time you've been assessing the durability of the immunity. That said, there are things you can measure (e.g. the presence of memory cells) that would strongly suggest more durable immunity to be verified with further longitudinal study.

2. Huh? No. I can't even begin to fathom your reasoning here. Please explain your question.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IStream said:

2. Huh? No. I can't even begin to fathom your reasoning here. Please explain your question.

Recent research is showing that those who have been infected with Covid-19 (dare I say it) have indeed developed immunity.  There is even research that indicates that some of the population already had pre-immunity to Covid-19.  Possibly acquired through exposure to related viruses.  That might explain for explain why children and mobile young people have been less affected than less mobile age cohorts.

So the question I was asking was if you vaccinate a Covid-19 naive person and it only protects them for a short time (shorter than having had Covid-19) then they need to be repeatedly vaccinated to prevent infection.  That period seems to be unknown at this stage.

Doesn't that prolong the pandemic?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

1. It will be logistically impossible to vaccinate everyone in a year. We just cannot make that many vaccine does. This is a global pandemic.

2. Many developing nations do not have the cold storage chain for mrna vaccines. Hopefully vaccines like JNJ will be succesful , but anyway you cut this, we are looking at at least a 3 year program to entirely eliminate the disease. Possibly longer because the disease is harder than Smallpox to detect and trace.

3. Don't worry, the good news is that vaccines and herd immunity will strand the virus in fewer and fewer locations . If we speculate that the vaccine lasts 3 years, then I think you will have at least one booster. If it lasts 1 year, I think we are going to be getting annual boosters for 4 years. Nobody wants this puppy  getting on the march again.

Do you think the manufacturers will be conservative or optimistic about length of immunity? If I was Moderna , I am going to be saying "Well it seems to last longer than  x years, but to be on the safe side, we recommend an periodic booster"  Which FDA official is going to risk being wrong?

 

Agreed, but my main point was that I doubt we will be required to get periodic booster shots in perpetuity as Scarecrow seems to believe.

Although our politicians seem to think everyone who wants to will be vaccinated by the end of 2021.  Yeah, I know, politicians.

As to your last point, maybe the FDA will take a more conservative approach with this virus than Smallpox, but the linked CDC article says "routine vaccination  against Smallpox among the general population was stopped because it was no longer needed".  So I'm kind of jumping to the conclusion that the coronavirus will be handled the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

EYESAILOR are you able to answer these questions:

1.  Given the speed with which these vaccines have been developed (5-6 months) and tested for 3-4 months is it fair to say that the level and length of immunity that they induce cannot have been accurately assessed yet?  I.e. there hasn't been long enough time.  Correct. See an earlier post of mine describing the issues involved with determining length of immunity

2.  If the immunity induced from these vaccines turns out to be only short lived then will it not prolong the pandemic?  It will require more vaccines. If it lasts 2 years you will have a bi-annual shot. If it lasts 5 years, you might require only one more booster for travel. If it lasts 6 months then we will be taking 6 monthly boosters for a long time BUT we will know if it lasts longer than 6 months very shortly. Fingers crossed.

This is all guesswork at the moment. Let us stay safe as we can for next 3-6 months, help is around the corner. NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO BE CARELESS.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

It will require more vaccines. If it lasts 2 years you will have a bi-annual shot. If it lasts 5 years, you might require only one more booster for travel. If it lasts 6 months then we will be taking 6 monthly boosters for a long time BUT we will know if it lasts longer than 6 months very shortly. Fingers crossed.

This is all guesswork at the moment. Let us stay safe as we can for next 3-6 months, help is around the corner. NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO BE CARELESS.

I agree now isn't the time to be careless.

But what concerns me is the speed that these vaccines have been developed.

What are you views on vaccine certification which will then give people more liberty than those that haven't been?  If I have had Covid-19 but choose not to have the vaccine shouldn't I be treated the same as those that have?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 12 metre said:

 the linked CDC article says "routine vaccination  against Smallpox among the general population was stopped because it was no longer needed".

yES the last case of smallpox was in 1977.  It was a very big deal when WHO announced the smallpox had been eliminated in 1980. I remember it.

The first smallpox vaccine was developed in 1801. It was a long haul. The real eradication program of well funded vaccinations began in 1966 and was finally successful by 1977. Vaccinations continued until 1980. However it had been absent due to vaccination from US and Europe since the early 50s. We still vaccinated because it was still present in Africa etc,

It will be the same here. Even if we have no cases of CV19 in the US, we will still vaccinate as long as it exists somewhere because Global Travel could bring it back at any time. I think we will have faster elimination time than the 11 years it took to eliminate SP but I would not be surprised if we are still boosting vaccines in 5 years. The downside to stopping too early is too great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

What are you views on vaccine certification which will then give people more liberty than those that haven't been?  If I have had Covid-19 but choose not to have the vaccine shouldn't I be treated the same as those that have?

 

Well, lets be clear about one thing.  The disease is a lot more dangerous than even the worst case adverse effects of any vaccine.  Even if you do not die, the after effects of CV19 are very unattractive.

So you definitely want to be vaccinated if you have not had the disease.

IATA is developing a passport which will record if someone has been vaccinated ....or if they have clear proof of having recovered from the disease and a high sutained level of antibodies.

I am very supportive of certification. Only way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EYESAILOR said:

I am very supportive of certification. Only way to go.

So where do you draw the line on that approach?  Influenza, HIV, measles, tetanus.....

At what stage does this approach impact the human immunity system to the point where we start to become more vulnerable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

At what stage does this approach impact the human immunity system to the point where we start to become more vulnerable?

Why would that be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

So where do you draw the line on that approach?  Influenza, HIV, measles, tetanus.....

At what stage does this approach impact the human immunity system to the point where we start to become more vulnerable?

Yellow Fever - Yes

Cholera - Yes

CV 19 - Yes

Tetanus - Voluntary ( its good to keep a record)

Flu - No.

HIV - There is no vaccine

Regarding CV19 vaccine, it will reduce vulnerability to CV19 because it has triggered a response identical to a disease response . We have no way of knowing but there is a remote possibility that it might also reduce vulnerability to other corona viruses . The Mrna vaccines work on the spike protein which is common in similar (but different ) ways to all corona virus. Reduce but not eliminate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

HIV - There is no vaccine

There is no vaccine but should there be a certification that you are HIV free?

9 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

Yellow Fever - Yes

Only in certain countries.  So if you are a resident of a Yellow Fever country and wish to travel or you wish to travel to a Yellow Fever country then you must be vaccinated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, 12 metre said:

Why would that be?

Classic examples throughout history where a new virus is introduced to a naive population and causes devastation.  Now that devastation can occur with diseases that have relatively benign impacts on the population they came from.

Examples through history - the Spanish sailing up to South America.

With the current lockdowns there is evidence that we are making our children more vulnerable to a range of diseases because they will be exposed later in their life than when their immunity system responses are at their best.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

With the current lockdowns there is evidence that we are making our children more vulnerable to a range of diseases because they will be exposed later in their life than when their immunity system responses are at their best.

 

There is evidence? Where? Habeus Corpus or shut the fuck up

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Weyalan said:

There is evidence? Where? Habeus Corpus or shut the fuck up

If children are not being vaccinated with approved vaccines for known diseases are they not being made more vulnerable?  

https://www.who.int/news/item/15-07-2020-who-and-unicef-warn-of-a-decline-in-vaccinations-during-covid-19

So we put our children at risk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to see your point. There isn't much point in vaccinating your child against whooping cough if it died of corona virus.

And, for the record, around these parts, lockdown has never prohibited you from going to a doctor, either for yourself nor for your children. I suspect people are choosing not to go out to see the doc, because they are scared, not because it is prohibited. Certainly here (Aus) and in the UK, "essential" stuff is allowed, including shopping for food and going to the doctor. Is that not the case elsewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Weyalan said:

Certainly here (Aus) and in the UK, "essential" stuff is allowed, including shopping for food and going to the doctor. Is that not the case elsewhere?

It is "allowed" but it isn't happening for a number of reasons.  People are scared and don't want to expose themselves regardless of the risk to their children and health providers have restricted access. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I've made a decision that given my age I would rather my 14 year old daughter experienced life than save mine.  She has had her whole year turned upside down this year.  Education and socialisation all affected.  Covid-19 is unlikely to kill her or even make her sick.  Her enforced sacrifice is more than mine and she had no control or voice over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

It is "allowed" but it isn't happening for a number of reasons.  People are scared and don't want to expose themselves regardless of the risk to their children and health providers have restricted access. 

Assuming for the sake of argument that is the case, then is your point, in fact, not that there is evidence that lockdowns are adversely affecting children's health, but rather than health providers restricting access is adversely affecting children'd health and / or people fear is adversely affecting etc... sure the result is the same, but it doesn't tie in with the current "lockdowns are teh debil" mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said "With the current lockdowns there is evidence that we are making our children more vulnerable to a range of diseases because they will be exposed later in their life than when their immunity system responses are at their best" ... which, when asked for that evidence, you quickly morphed to "children are not being vaccinated with approved vaccines for known diseases", which is a completely different point, but is also, like the preceding, one that has nothing to do with the current lockdowns. I am sure that lockdowns are an inconvenience for you and probably for your 14 yr old daughter.  But lockdowns aren't the problem here, they are actually a part of the solution. If you want to shake your fist, at least shake it in the right direction.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Weyalan said:

You said "With the current lockdowns there is evidence that we are making our children more vulnerable to a range of diseases because they will be exposed later in their life than when their immunity system responses are at their best" ... which, when asked for that evidence, you quickly morphed to "children are not being vaccinated with approved vaccines for known diseases", which is a completely different point, but is also, like the preceding, one that has nothing to do with the current lockdowns. I am sure that lockdowns are an inconvenience for you and probably for your 14 yr old daughter.  But lockdowns aren't the problem here, they are actually a part of the solution. If you want to shake your fist, at least shake it in the right direction.

But lockdowns have other consequences or impacts that you don't recognise.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kate short for Bob said:

But lockdowns have other consequences or impacts that you don't recognise.  

You have absolutely no idea what I do or do not recognise. I simply pointed out a specific example of you talking bollocks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

What "bollocks" am I talking?

You said "With the current lockdowns there is evidence that we are making our children more vulnerable to a range of diseases because they will be exposed later in their life than when their immunity system responses are at their best" ... which, when asked for that evidence, you quickly morphed to "children are not being vaccinated with approved vaccines for known diseases", which is a completely different point, but is also, like the preceding, one that has nothing to do with the current lockdowns.

The above would be a specific example, but in general, pretty much everything you say, I just cherry-picked a low hanger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Weyalan said:

You said "With the current lockdowns there is evidence that we are making our children more vulnerable to a range of diseases because they will be exposed later in their life than when their immunity system responses are at their best" ... which, when asked for that evidence, you quickly morphed to "children are not being vaccinated with approved vaccines for known diseases", which is a completely different point, but is also, like the preceding, one that has nothing to do with the current lockdowns.

The above would be a specific example, but in general, pretty much everything you say, I just cherry-picked a low hanger

Your point escapes me.  But simply my point is - why lockdown children that are not going to succumb to Covid-19?

If you do is that because you think they will spread the disease and make YOU more vulnerable?

So we lock down the unvulnerable and make them more vulnerable to disease's that we have been trying to make safe from.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Your point escapes me.  But simply my point is - why lockdown children that are not going to succumb to Covid-19?

If you do is that because you think they will spread the disease and make YOU more vulnerable?

So we lock down the unvulnerable and make them more vulnerable to disease's that we have been trying to make safe from.  

That my point escapes you is blatantly obvious.

If you don't prevent transmission to others via children, you aren't actually locking down... you are inconveniencing (yes; lockdown are invonvenient) everyone else for no benefit. And it is possible to make an argument that we shouldn't lockdown. I disagree with the argument, but that isn't the point. The point is that locking down some of the population while letting a sizable cohort be unlocked has almost all of the negatives of lockdown and none of the positives.

I am entirely unworried about my own vulnerability or lack thereof. However, I have followed the requirements for Covid restrictions in my area pretty much to the letter, but again, I emphasise that has nothing to do with my perception of my own vulnerability... bet you have no idea why I did, though.

You keep on saying that locking down makes children (I assume that's what you mean by "unvulnerable" (sic)) more vulnerable to diseases... as though, somehow, repeating it frequently will somehow make it transform into truth... somebody told me that's called "gaslighting"... I say it's not just a river in Eygypt.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

To be honest I've made a decision that given my age I would rather my 14 year old daughter experienced life than save mine.  She has had her whole year turned upside down this year.  Education and socialisation all affected.  Covid-19 is unlikely to kill her or even make her sick.  Her enforced sacrifice is more than mine and she had no control or voice over it.

Covid 19 can make her sick. Typically she will feel unwell for 3-5 days and then recover. During that time there will be considerable stress on her vascular system which will not be immediately obvious however it may effect her health and fitness for decades. We really dont know, dont fully understand and have only just began to study the effects of CV19 on young people.

Please dont risk her health. She has her whole life ahead of her.. It is only a few months till vaccines are available. It will have been only one year out of her life. She can make it.Her whole generation will look back and remember themselves as the Covid 19 generation. They will reminisce about this year and ask friends they havent even met yet, how they spent the year of corona virus.  They will tell their children about it. it is like a certain older generation can remember exactly where they were when Kennedy was shot and it is nothing compared to the dislocation of WW2.  So please....parents......keep your kids safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Weyalan said:

... I say it's not just a river in Eygpt.

In Denial again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Weyalan said:

The point is that locking down some of the population while letting a sizable cohort be unlocked has almost all of the negatives of lockdown and none of the positives.

bingo

Can you imagine the head explosions and protests if some people are declared vulnerable while everyone else parties? And how the fuck is that decided and how the fuck is that enforced. And then when the unvulnerable start getting sick, sometimes to the detriment of their long-term health, the complaints start that a society wide lockdown will start. It's a no-win decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Weyalan said:

That my point escapes you is blatantly obvious.

 The point is that locking down some of the population while letting a sizable cohort be unlocked has almost all of the negatives of lockdown and none of the positives.

I

 

+1

Although all lock downs are partial to some extent because essential services stay open. But those providing essential services can stay separate from interaction

Bottom line is that in the uS we have failed to control the disease spread and we do not have the will for a further round of lock downs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we had ever ALL had the will to put on masks for several weeks this spring/summer nobody would be locking down now. Covidiots never seemed capable of grasping that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moreover, I find the pandemic has brought out the worst in me, made me a much harder person. I read a tweet recently where someone said some things would never be back to normal, one being their relationship with people who turned out to be covid deniers, antimaskers, etc. 

Yeah, me too. Fuck em. And fuck their businesses, services, etc. Not going back to my happy-talk unmasked customer hair salon, going to think hard about my ineffective-measure (partition not an aerosol blocker) but masked at least nail place, no way any bars or restaurants that flouted rules, etc. And fuck their stimulus payments too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2020 at 8:43 PM, Kate short for Bob said:

To be honest I've made a decision that given my age I would rather my 14 year old daughter experienced life than save mine.  She has had her whole year turned upside down this year.  Education and socialisation all affected....

You are the parent of course.  But in my opinion you do your child a great disservice. 

Your child will go through many phases of life /work/play.  Take it on the chin,  teach her to learn to adapt,  and keep yourself safe for her benefit if not yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

If we had ever ALL had the will to put on masks for several weeks this spring/summer nobody would be locking down now. Covidiots never seemed capable of grasping that. 

Masks are essential but what we have also learned is that the disease is highly infectious . In countries with tracing, it has been traced to trash can lids, food deliveries etc etc.  So continuously wiping hands and cleaning is essential.

I think the greatest failings were:

1.  No mandatory masks.

2. Allowing unlimited domestic travel between states .  Look how Australia limited the spread by closing state borders. It essentially bankrupt the airlines but allowed states to localize the problems. Same with China that closed travel the moment an outbreak occurred.

Their airlines survived because their lock down was so swift and short.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this