Jump to content

The Third Booster Shot Debate - Are U going to get the booster?


Recommended Posts

Yeah, one wonders what the politics are in the yes, no, maybe decisions.  Good news for you is Walgreens has good scheduling. YOU CAN DOWNLOAD FORMS AND FILL OUT IN ADVANCE. Nobody round here seems busy vaxxing. Take your CDC card!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 680
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I got my booster shot this morning and now totally understand the anti-vaxxers!  For starters, it took almost ten minutes from start to finish. I don’t have time for that. On top of that, it was free.

An excerpt from an excellent interview covering almost everything Covid https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/health/article/covid-expert-ben-neuman-vaccines-can-beat-variant-16412468.ph

Got home to Florida from Maine Sunday night. Walked into the Publix supermarket pharmacy five minutes from our house this morning with our vax cards in hand, got our Pfizer boosters, and did our groce

Posted Images

I don't see a lot of politics in it. The Biden administration reasonably would like to get boosters into as many arms as possible to blunt a likely winter surge, while the FDA is only charged with evaluating the available evidence for efficacy and need, although they appear to have devalued the utility in slowing any winter surge, focussing instead on hospitalization and death likelihood for older and vulnerable people as their immunity level wanes. Eventually we will get there, hopefully without too many issues for vaccinated folk.

Sadly there are still way too many unvaccinated folk, including some otherwise seemingly sensible people, like the awesome retired mechanic Mustie1, whose YouTube channel I follow faithfully and have learned a ton from, who appears not to have gotten vaccinated and got knocked for a loop by delta for the past month. He still sounds terrible on his latest video. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The unvaxxed will always be with us.  A week of illness and lost work, spreading it around the kids, etc. is a problem for younger people. They are back on that counterproductive "don't kill granny" story, which does not tell us that we are all in this together. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My 8 months are up come mid-November. Based on today’s recommendation I’ll be getting a 3rd shot. Slightly sore arm after the first, absolutely no reaction to the second.  Pfizer.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jerseyguy said:

My 8 months are up come mid-November. Based on today’s recommendation I’ll be getting a 3rd shot. Slightly sore arm after the first, absolutely no reaction to the second.  Pfizer.

Oops. The latest advisory is now saying 6 months after the 2nd shot.  That means this month for me.  Better start making some phone calls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not as nuts as this spring. Around here, Walgreens, CVS, Safeway do shots. You can walk in. I make appointments for us at Walgreens to fill out the consent form in advance. Whole day was wide open. Safeway offers 10% off shopping coupons and walk in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2021 at 9:57 AM, EYESAILOR said:

For those of you who are vaccinated, what do you think?

Are you going to take the booster shot?

Obviously there has been no trial on effect of the booster shot. Pfizer has indicated that it thinks the vaccine starts to fade around 4-6 months. CDC has pushed back on that saying insufficient evidence.  

Im not sure how they conduct a meaningful trial. In theory they would need to take a very large sample of people, giving half the placebo and half a booster shot and see how the numbers hold up vs Delta variant, but they would need to do that very soon.

I never got a certificate due to poor record keeping by hospital so Im thinking about the booster.

Not if you follow the science you won’t. So says the FDA Advisory Panel 16:2 vote against the Biden plan to give boosters to all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Wess said:

Not if you follow the science you won’t. So says the FDA Advisory Panel 16:2 vote against the Biden plan to give boosters to all. 

We shall see 

international travel requires that you conform to the host countries Covid protocol 

if they require a booster… you will have no choice 

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

We shall see 

international travel requires that you conform to the host countries Covid protocol 

if they require a booster… you will have no choice 

Oh I agree; science will not stop politics. Biden has proven that beyond any shadow of a doubt. 
 

See that’s the thing. For all the crap thrown at the last administration - much of it deserved - this one is far far worse and frankly far more deceitful about it. Anyone would be a fool to listen to or trust a politician or anyone affiliated with one. Alas now a days everyone including the medical community is aligned with a political POV and wedded to its agenda.  Truth or science doesn’t really matter. And that my friend is why you have vaccine hesitancy. 

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

Not if you follow the science you won’t. So says the FDA Advisory Panel 16:2 vote against the Biden plan to give boosters to all. 

The FDA Advisory panel voted unanimously in favor of the booster shot for 65 and older, and for "at risk" candidates. The panel expressed support for approving boosters for healthcare workers at risk for exposure to Covid-19 while at work but were not asked to formally vote on the matter.

They voted against recommending approval for a broad Pfizer booster shot on the basis that there was not enough data yet to justify giving a booster to the general population.

"The panelists acknowledged that data show that the protection conferred to the vaccinated is waning over time, but argued the overwhelming number of vaccinated people have sufficient protection at this time to cope with any infection without requiring hospitalization or risking death.

The vaccine “may eventually be indicated for the general population, I just don’t think we’re there yet,” said Ofer Levy, the director of the Precision Vaccines Program at Boston Children’s Hospital."  STAT news.

I read that as , waiting for more data  and not as negative dat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, what difference does it make ? 

either you believe that the vaccinations have some efficacy, and you accept the risk of side effects or you don't. 

With several co-morbidities, my personal calculation was to take it and go on about my life, including last week in Cancun, MX. 

I had my third Moderna two weeks back, mild side effects consistent with first two (sore shoulder, fatigue, lassitude) 

For what it's worth, the Mexican's we saw at airport, resort and transportation were very consistent in masking.

Temperature scans at entrances to some buildings and sanitizer dispensed at doors of some as well. 

Covid test for US return was quick and efficient, only issue was American Airlines APP didn't play nicely with the "VERIFLY" app they made us download. 

Then it would not allow check in as it was adamant that I was not cleared.... 

Resolved on phone and at physical check in, 

 

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

The FDA Advisory panel voted unanimously in favor of the booster shot for 65 and older, and for "at risk" candidates. The panel expressed support for approving boosters for healthcare workers at risk for exposure to Covid-19 while at work but were not asked to formally vote on the matter.

They voted against recommending approval for a broad Pfizer booster shot on the basis that there was not enough data yet to justify giving a booster to the general population.

"The panelists acknowledged that data show that the protection conferred to the vaccinated is waning over time, but argued the overwhelming number of vaccinated people have sufficient protection at this time to cope with any infection without requiring hospitalization or risking death.

The vaccine “may eventually be indicated for the general population, I just don’t think we’re there yet,” said Ofer Levy, the director of the Precision Vaccines Program at Boston Children’s Hospital."  STAT news.

I read that as , waiting for more data  and not as negative dat.

Of course you do. Nice selective out of context quote. Listen to the whole meeting (bet you didn’t: yes I did) or read the whole transcript. 
 

Not that it matters. You will still come to the same push the needle conclusion. You always do. 

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

Of course you do. Nice selective out of context quote. Listen to the whole meeting (bet you didn’t: yes I did) or read the whole transcript. 
 

Not that it matters. You will still come to the same push the needle conclusion. You always do. 

I am supportive of vaccination. I have not taken a position on the booster. If you read my o post you will see that I wrote how it will be very difficult to determine if a booster shot is effective.

If you believe that "follow the science" means following the FDA advisory panel recommendations then your position should be in favor of initial vaccination.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Wess said:

Of course you do. Nice selective out of context quote. Listen to the whole meeting (bet you didn’t: yes I did) or read the whole transcript. 
 

Not that it matters. You will still come to the same push the needle conclusion. You always do. 

I dont have time to listen to an 8 hour meeting. I looked for the transcript but I dont see it published.

However, I looked at the Israeli submission because I was interested to see the real world results of a large population 3rd booster campaign. Israel administered a booster shot to 2.5 million people. The slides of the presentation are here for anyone interested : https://www.fda.gov/media/152205/download

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/09/17/covid-booster-shots-fda-recommendation/

Maybe you have to have gotten over illusions of personal invincibility to expect MORE than not being hospitalized or dying.  I don’t want to get covid at all and I don't want others to, either. Sick but not hospitalized people wandering around is no way to run a pandemic response. It's not ok.

 

20210918_100410.jpg

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

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/09/17/covid-booster-shots-fda-recommendation/

Maybe you have to have gotten over illusions of personal invincibility to expect MORE than not being hospitalized or dying.  I don’t want to get covid at all and I don't want others to, either. Sick but not hospitalized people wandering around is no way to run a pandemic response. It's not ok.

 

20210918_100410.jpg

^^^ exactly. “Not dead, on a ventilator, or hospitalized” is not the standard I am aiming for. I am going for “healthy”.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, IStream said:

That's Fauci's position in favor of boosters too. If you can keep people from getting sick at all, society can function more normally.

Or at least that fraction of society that's willing to be part of society...

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

 

The vaccine “may eventually be indicated for the general population, I just don’t think we’re there yet,” said Ofer Levy, the director of the Precision Vaccines Program at Boston Children’s Hospital."  STAT news.

I read that as , waiting for more data  and not as negative dat.

Snipped it down to the last bit, hoping this happens since I am a little younger (62 on Thursday) & would like a booster sometime before Easter for the upcoming convention (the anime one).

 

 

 

 

 

Bet the Paramount Hotel would love to have my money too!

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

Christina Pushaw

Press Secretary at EOG

EOGThe Johns Hopkins University - Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS)

Tallahassee, Florida, United States248 connections

 

 

How about a link to the entire statement, so we can get the whole picture?

In FL, the governor has been urging everyone and his dog with any coronavirus symptoms to get the “free” monoclonal antibody treatment as soon as the have a sniffle or test positive.

It’s a shame he won’t put the same effort into pushing for vaccinations.

Each treatment cost the taxpayers about $6500, vs less than $50 for a vaccination.

Both are “free” to the consumer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, accnick said:

How about a link to the entire statement, so we can get the whole picture?

In FL, the governor has been urging everyone and his dog with any coronavirus symptoms to get the “free” monoclonal antibody treatment as soon as the have a sniffle or test positive.

It’s a shame he won’t put the same effort into pushing for vaccinations.

Each treatment cost the taxpayers about $6500, vs less than $50 for a vaccination.

Both are “free” to the consumer. 

More than half of the sick folks were vaccinated 

Is this clear ?

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

 

They voted against recommending approval for a broad Pfizer booster shot on the basis that there was not enough data yet to justify giving a booster to the general population.

 

OK lets run with this for a moment.

Months ago now Biden was out announcing a government program of covid vaccine boosters for all (over 16).  Even mandating covid vaccines and vaccine passports.  Still is..  But "not enough data" you say? Even before the data was sent to FDA Biden announced his plan and political lap dog Fauci was right there barking up the same tree and still is.

ALL WITHOUT DATA!

FDA Directors of the vaccine program RESIGNED over this.  The expert panel voted overwhelmingly AGAINST the Biden/Fauci plan (over lack of data you say). 

  * So tell me again why anyone who can fog a mirror would trust anything Biden and Fauci say?

  * What does it take for you needle pushers to admit you were wrong?

I have to laugh when you can't figure out why there is vaccine hesitancy.  Uh DUH... because you are a bunch of lying sacks of shit and eventually truths makes it way out. 

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

OK lets run with this for a moment.

Months ago now Biden was out announcing a government program of covid vaccine boosters for all (over 16).  Even mandating covid vaccines and vaccine passports.  Still is..  But "not enough data" you say? Even before the data was sent to FDA Biden announced his plan and political lap dog Fauci was right there barking up the same tree and still is.

ALL WITHOUT DATA!

FDA Directors of the vaccine program RESIGNED over this.  The expert panel voted overwhelmingly AGAINST the Biden/Fauci plan (over lack of data you say). 

  * So tell me again why anyone who can fog a mirror would trust anything Biden and Fauci say?

  * What does it take for you needle pushers to admit you were wrong?

I have to laugh when you can't figure out why there is vaccine hesitancy.  Uh DUH... because you are a bunch of lying sacks of shit and eventually truths makes it way out. 

This is a very confused rant and barely worth responding to.

Here are the facts:-

The FDA advisory panel voted 17-4 in favor of approving the use of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine for 16 and older.

The FDA advisory panel voted unanimously if favor of a booster shot for those that are 65 and older + higher risk categories.

The FDA advisory panel voted 16-2 against a booster shot for those 16-64

How you choose to politicize those facts is up to you.

 

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

More than half of the sick folks were vaccinated 

Is this clear ?

So, guess what?

Christina Pushaw, source of that "statistic", is the Press Secretary for Florida governor Ron DeSantis. DeSantis is pushing monoclonal antibody treatments rather than vaccinations, as he has serious presidential ambitions, and doesn't want to be seen as actively promoting vaccinations, since half or more of the Republican base is anti-vax.

While the vaccines are very effective at keeping people out of the hospital and dying, they do not prevent all infections

Here is who is eligible for treatment in Florida right now (this is from the Florida Department of Health website today):

"Monoclonal antibody treatments can be prescribed by health care providers to individuals 12 years of age and older who have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and who have been exposed to someone with COVID-19 and are at high risk for severe illness and hospitalization.

However, to support Governor DeSantis’ initiative, there is currently a standing order in Florida signed by the State Surgeon General that allows patients to receive this treatment without a prescription or referral if administered by an eligible health care provider. Such referrals are not required at any of the State of Florida monoclonal antibody treatment sites and treatments are available at no cost to patients."

 

In other words, right now in FL you can walk in and get a "free" monoclonal antibody treatment at any official treatment site, whether or not you have COVID, just by saying you may have been exposed and you want the treatment. No questions asked.

Florida has been using a highly disproportionate amount of the monoclonal antibody treatments available in the US, in large part because DeSantis wants to be seen as the savior of the state's vulnerable. He won't push cheap vaccinations that have full FDA approval, but will push an expensive treatment that is not fully-approved as long as it is paid for by the federal government.

It is a cynical political ploy.

Florida has been using so much of the available supply that the CDC is taking over the distribution, rather than allowing the states to go straight to the manufacturer. The CDC will allocate the amount to each state based on current infection rates and the ability to utilize the treatment supply.

Of course, DeSantis is (as are other Florida politicians) screaming that it is Joe Biden out to punish Florida for voting for DeSantis and Trump, and is trying to make DeSantis look bad.

I wonder whose behavior DeSantis is modeling?

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, accnick said:

So, guess what?

Christina Pushaw, source of that "statistic", is the Press Secretary for Florida governor Ron DeSantis. DeSantis is pushing monoclonal antibody treatments rather than vaccinations, as he has serious presidential ambitions, and doesn't want to be seen as actively promoting vaccinations, since half or more of the Republican base is anti-vax.

While the vaccines are very effective at keeping people out of the hospital and dying, they do not prevent all infections

Here is who is eligible for treatment in Florida right now (this is from the Florida Department of Health website today):

"Monoclonal antibody treatments can be prescribed by health care providers to individuals 12 years of age and older who have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and who have been exposed to someone with COVID-19 and are at high risk for severe illness and hospitalization.

However, to support Governor DeSantis’ initiative, there is currently a standing order in Florida signed by the State Surgeon General that allows patients to receive this treatment without a prescription or referral if administered by an eligible health care provider. Such referrals are not required at any of the State of Florida monoclonal antibody treatment sites and treatments are available at no cost to patients."

 

In other words, right now in FL you can walk in and get a "free" monoclonal antibody treatment at any official treatment site, whether or not you have COVID, just by saying you may have been exposed and you want the treatment. No questions asked.

Florida has been using a highly disproportionate amount of the monoclonal antibody treatments available in the US, in large part because DeSantis wants to be seen as the savior of the state's vulnerable. He won't push cheap vaccinations that have full FDA approval, but will push an expensive treatment that is not fully-approved as long as it is paid for by the federal government.

It is a cynical political ploy.

Florida has been using so much of the available supply that the CDC is taking over the distribution, rather than allowing the states to go straight to the manufacturer. The CDC will allocate the amount to each state based on current infection rates and the ability to utilize the treatment supply.

Of course, DeSantis is (as are other Florida politicians) screaming that it is Joe Biden out to punish Florida for voting for DeSantis and Trump, and is trying to make DeSantis look bad.

I wonder whose behavior DeSantis is modeling?

 

#TrumphausenbyProxy

Trump took Munchausen by Proxy, improved it, and turned it into a Trump brand!  Trump has granted this Trump branding license to DeDantis!  He’s no dummy!  The Ivy League must be so proud!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2021 at 4:44 AM, Wess said:

Oh I agree; science will not stop politics. Biden has proven that beyond any shadow of a doubt. 
 

See that’s the thing. For all the crap thrown at the last administration - much of it deserved - this one is far far worse and frankly far more deceitful about it. Anyone would be a fool to listen to or trust a politician or anyone affiliated with one. Alas now a days everyone including the medical community is aligned with a political POV and wedded to its agenda.  Truth or science doesn’t really matter. And that my friend is why you have vaccine hesitancy. 

No, vaccine hesitancy today is the same as vaccine hesitancy from 20 years ago. Someone “publishes” some bullshit, and the folks who desperately want to not make a decision, grab it and go. It just spreads much faster now due to social.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, accnick said:

So, guess what?

Christina Pushaw, source of that "statistic", is the Press Secretary for Florida governor Ron DeSantis. DeSantis is pushing monoclonal antibody treatments rather than vaccinations, as he has serious presidential ambitions, and doesn't want to be seen as actively promoting vaccinations, since half or more of the Republican base is anti-vax.

While the vaccines are very effective at keeping people out of the hospital and dying, they do not prevent all infections

Here is who is eligible for treatment in Florida right now (this is from the Florida Department of Health website today):

"Monoclonal antibody treatments can be prescribed by health care providers to individuals 12 years of age and older who have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and who have been exposed to someone with COVID-19 and are at high risk for severe illness and hospitalization.

However, to support Governor DeSantis’ initiative, there is currently a standing order in Florida signed by the State Surgeon General that allows patients to receive this treatment without a prescription or referral if administered by an eligible health care provider. Such referrals are not required at any of the State of Florida monoclonal antibody treatment sites and treatments are available at no cost to patients."

 

In other words, right now in FL you can walk in and get a "free" monoclonal antibody treatment at any official treatment site, whether or not you have COVID, just by saying you may have been exposed and you want the treatment. No questions asked.

Florida has been using a highly disproportionate amount of the monoclonal antibody treatments available in the US, in large part because DeSantis wants to be seen as the savior of the state's vulnerable. He won't push cheap vaccinations that have full FDA approval, but will push an expensive treatment that is not fully-approved as long as it is paid for by the federal government.

It is a cynical political ploy.

Florida has been using so much of the available supply that the CDC is taking over the distribution, rather than allowing the states to go straight to the manufacturer. The CDC will allocate the amount to each state based on current infection rates and the ability to utilize the treatment supply.

Of course, DeSantis is (as are other Florida politicians) screaming that it is Joe Biden out to punish Florida for voting for DeSantis and Trump, and is trying to make DeSantis look bad.

I wonder whose behavior DeSantis is modeling?

 

Florida has the same vaccination rate as the rest of the US 

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

Florida has the same vaccination rate as the rest of the US 

That's a fucking lie.

There are places in the US that are approaching 90%, and smaller places above that.

Red states are below the average... Florida included.

Red states have much higher covid deaths.

Why is that, bullshitter?

- DSK

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

Florida has the same vaccination rate as the rest of the US 

It’s considered traditional (and polite) when splitting hairs in public to at least hint at which hairs you might be splitting.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Red states have much higher covid deaths.

Why is that, bullshitter?

Because it isn't true.  

Deaths per Million Top 10 States have no relationship to Political Party.  So it is a pointless comparison.

Mississippi Red

New Jersey Blue

Louisiana Blue/Red

New York Blue

Alabama Red

Arizona Blue/Red

Massachusetts Blue

Rhode Island Blue

Arkansas Red

South Dakota Red

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

That's a fucking lie.

There are places in the US that are approaching 90%, and smaller places above that.

Red states are below the average... Florida included.

Red states have much higher covid deaths.

Why is that, bullshitter?

- DSK

In fairness to Slug, as of yesterday, 66% of FL residents had received at least a first dose, and 50.4% are fully vaccinated.

Across all states, the average is 63.5% with at least the first dose, and 54.2% fully vaccinated.

Therefore, Florida is slightly below the US average when it come to the percentage of population that is fully vaccinated.

On a state-by-state basis, FL rates about 20th out of 50. Some southern states have truly dismal numbers.

Florida did well out of the box, as DeSantis prioritized those over 65, which is both a good chunk of the population and a reliable voting bloc.

He’s nobody’s fool, even if he acts like one.

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

In fairness to Slug, as of yesterday, 66% of FL residents had received at least a first dose, and 50.4% are fully vaccinated.

Across all states, the average is 63.5% with at least the first dose, and 54.2% fully vaccinated.

Therefore, Florida is slightly below the US average when it come to the percentage of population that is fully vaccinated.

On a state-by-state basis, FL rates about 20th out of 50. Some southern states have truly dismal numbers.

Florida did well out of the box, as DeSantis prioritized those over 65, which is both a good chunk of the population and a reliable voting bloc.

He’s nobody’s fool, even if he acts like one.

No, there is a lot of evidence that he's not stupid at all. Which makes his fucking over the people of the state worse.

And if you look at covid deaths since the beginning of the pandemic, then there is not a very clear red-state slant. But if you look at the past 6 months, since the emergence of the vaccine, it's very clear.

The current list of death leaders, 3 of the top 15 are not red states. If you look at a 7-day moving average map, county by county, there is almost a 100% correlation of the worst counties being the Trump-iest.

 

20 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Sweden by the same measure has done better than 40 USA States regardless of their political control.

?? WTF has Sweden got to do with it? Did many people in Sweden vote for Trump?

- DSK

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

Because it isn't true.  

Deaths per Million Top 10 States have no relationship to Political Party.  So it is a pointless comparison.

Mississippi Red

New Jersey Blue

Louisiana Blue/Red

New York Blue

Alabama Red

Arizona Blue/Red

Massachusetts Blue

Rhode Island Blue

Arkansas Red

South Dakota Red

 

From https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/us-coronavirus-deaths-by-state-july-1.html

Here is a breakdown of average daily COVID-19 deaths and COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people over the last seven days in all 50 U.S. states and Washington, D.C. The data was last updated Sept. 17.

Note: States are ranked by deaths per 100,000. The list includes ties. 

Florida
Deaths per 100,000: 1.69
Daily average deaths: 362.6

Mississippi
Deaths per 100,000: 1.42
Daily average deaths: 42.1

South Carolina
Deaths per 100,000: 1.34
Daily average deaths: 68.9

Idaho
Deaths per 100,000: 1.22
Daily average deaths: 21.9

Louisiana
Deaths per 100,000: 1.15
Daily average deaths: 53.4

Georgia
Deaths per 100,000: 1.12
Daily average deaths: 119.6

Arkansas
Deaths per 100,000: 1.07
Daily average deaths: 32.3

Texas
Deaths per 100,000: 1.03
Daily average deaths: 297.3

West Virginia
Deaths per 100,000: 0.99
Daily average deaths: 17.7

Wyoming
Deaths per 100,000: 0.96
Daily average deaths: 5.6

Alabama
Deaths per 100,000: 0.89
Daily average deaths: 43.4

Tennessee
Deaths per 100,000: 0.85
Daily average deaths: 58

Oklahoma
Deaths per 100,000: 0.84
Daily average deaths: 33.1

Kentucky
Deaths per 100,000: 0.76
Daily average deaths: 34

 

Seems pretty clear that places where there are a large number of dumbasses who voted for a born-rich multi-bankrupt TV star, and who are afraid to get vaccinated, are now suffering higher rates of disease and death.

Of course, they already were... map out infant mortality, for example, or rates of single-car accidents, or average SAT scores... and you'll get the same result. Covid just raised the stakes

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Florida
Deaths per 100,000: 1.69
Daily average deaths: 362.6

I don't know why you insist on turning the pandemic in to a polidemic but the figures you quoted (or rather the publication you quoted) is wrong.  It doesn't account for age distribution or seasonality or any other factor that affects the virus.  It is a seven day snapshot.

For example the total deaths per 100,000 for the entire pandemic for Florida is 237 yet the article says 1.69 for the week.  Surely that is a positive result?  

Not only that but the data the article quotes for Florida daily average deaths is wrong which puts the whole article in doubt.  The data from Ourworldindata, Worldometer and from the official Florida Gov data says it is lower than than that.  http://ww11.doh.state.fl.us/comm/_partners/covid19_report_archive/covid19-data/covid19_data_latest.pdf

The average daily deaths for Florida have never been 362 for the entire pandemic!!!  Certainly not for the week that the article refers to i.e. 10 September to 17 September 2021.

image.png.4cf1edc111d0e351ea8f63fb1181cf18.png

 

 

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

I don't know why you insist on turning the pandemic in to a polidemic but the figures you quoted (or rather the publication you quoted) is wrong.....

Just the facts.

When I shoot down your bullshit, more bullshit is a poor answer

FACT- the best way to avoid severe illness or death from SARS2/CoVid-19 is thru vaccination

FACT- there is a political faction within the USA that has made resistance to vaccine one of their public principles.

FACT- this has been a disaster for the people of this political faction

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Just the facts.

When I shoot down your bullshit, more bullshit is a poor answer

But what you posted from the Beckers Hospital weren't facts.  The article you referenced seemed to be a complete fabrication.  That doesn't help your argument nor does it do anything to change people's attitudes.  I agree with @EYESAILOR banging on about it being a political issue rather than a health issue and using dubious data to support the arguments makes the situation worse.

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

But what you posted from the Beckers Hospital weren't facts.  The article you referenced seemed to be a complete fabrication.....

"Covid is a Democrat hoax"

Is that really going to be your fallback position?

- DSK

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

"Covid is a Democrat hoax"

Is that really going to be your fallback position?

- DSK

Nothing of the sort.  I was just referring to the flaws in the article you posted.  I have no idea what the political persuasion of Becker's Hospital Services owners and managers are.  It is irrelevant.  However accurate data is relevant. 

 

5 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

From https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/us-coronavirus-deaths-by-state-july-1.html

Here is a breakdown of average daily COVID-19 deaths and COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people over the last seven days in all 50 U.S. states and Washington, D.C. The data was last updated Sept. 17.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who allow themselves to get drawn into a red vs blue debate on covid into are enabling those who want to politicize the disease.   Covid doesnt care whether you voted republican or democrat, it is an ecumenical disease.

Higher income, white, educated and vaccinated people from either political persuasion insulting lower income, less well educated , whites and minorities who are not vaccinated comes across as condescending at best.  At worst it is actually playing into the hands of the anti-vaxers and widening the divide at a time when this nation should be pulling together.

But the topic of this thread is not politics or the death rate in Florida, the topic is the booster shot.

So far only @slug zitski has posted facts (if they are facts) in support of the booster shot.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the FDA Expert Panel and Advisory Committee voted clearly against most of you getting boosters and that's a fact.

Its also a fact hat Biden and Fauci recommended and pursued doing the exact opposite despite not even having the data and that's another fact.

And then there is the fact that FDA senior officials most closely associated with vaccine approvals resigned over Biden's BS.

Damn those facts.

Que the needle pushers...

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

Well the FDA Expert Panel and Advisory Committee voted clearly against most of you getting boosters and that's a fact.

nope , as usual you are tailoring facts to suit your argument .

Quote

A Food and Drug Administration advisory panel overwhelmingly voted Friday against giving Pfizer-BioNTech's Covid-19 booster shots to most people on Friday, agreeing only to distribute them to people ages 65 and up as well as those at high risk of severe illness.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/fda-advisory-group-rejects-covid-boosters-limits-high-risk-groups-rcna2074

suspect you'll find the majority here actually do fit into that category

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Wess said:

Well the FDA Expert Panel and Advisory Committee voted clearly against most of you getting boosters and that's a fact.

Its also a fact hat Biden and Fauci recommended and pursued doing the exact opposite despite not even having the data and that's another fact.

And then there is the fact that FDA senior officials most closely associated with vaccine approvals resigned over Biden's BS.

Damn those facts.

Que the needle pushers...

1 fact

1 speculation

1 vague and unsubstantiated claim to a fact.

 

You have a lower hurdle for facts than I .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably a majority of the vaccinated in toto are over 65 and/or high risk.  That spring peak of vaccinations was those folks.  You don't have to be fat. Skinny people who work out can have high blood pressure, for example. 

So those are recommended to have boosters.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2021 at 7:27 AM, EYESAILOR said:

Here are the facts:-

The FDA advisory panel voted 17-4 in favor of approving the use of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine for 16 and older.

The FDA advisory panel voted unanimously if favor of a booster shot for those that are 65 and older + higher risk categories.

The FDA advisory panel voted 16-2 against a booster shot for those 16-64

How you choose to politicize those facts is up to you.

 

 

4 hours ago, Wess said:

No you just lie alot.

Interesting response.

I am truthful to a fault.

Your credibility when you accuse public figures of lying is undermined when you accuse everyone around you of lying. I recommend "The Speed of Trust" by Steve Covey.  

Best,

Eye 

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

No you just lie alot.

Interesting response.

I am truthful to a fault.

Your credibility when you accuse public figures of lying is undermined when you accuse everyone around you of lying. I recommend "The Speed of Trust" by Steve Covey.  

Best,

Eye 

Methinks it's a bit of projection.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL when you cant even admit that Biden and Fauci got waayyy ahead of the data here you have zero credibility.

Fun the watch the AC smack them upside the head with a reality check.

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

LOL when you cant even admit that Biden and Fauci got waayyy ahead of the data here you have zero credibility.

Fun the watch the AC smack them upside the head with a reality check.

Imagine if this wasn't new territory and better info came out continually. Imagine!

 

(and I'm not currently in the 3rd shot protocol, but I would guess I'll be added before too long, and will take it when it's the protocol.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was and Mr C because he is my caregiver.  That does not mean he does housework, I suspect. Got it. Packs a punch but no regrets.  Made his arm a little more sore, briefly. They say women have stronger reactions. Glad to have it before I start showing up at a hospital every day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets get back on the topic of the booster shot and not get distracted by Wess's incoherent one liners and political diatribes.

I think the FDA advisory panel recommendation was reasonably clear cut. They recommend authorizing/approving a booster shot for 65 and over (higher risk categories) but not for the younger cohorts.

But the press completely omitted to mention what happened at the very end of the meeting when the question of a booster shot for healthcare workers came up.

What I found very useful about the meeting was the presentations and significant amount of data that was released to the public for the first time.  At this stage, I feel that the booster shot is a matter of personal choice. If asked about vaccination, I would strongly recommend getting vaccinated. If asked about getting a booster shot, I would advise looking at the data and making your own assessment.    Do not base your decision on twitter, facebook or sailing anarchy but take a look at the submissions to the FDA and decide what is right for you.  I have no doubt in my mind that the subject will be revisited by the FDA and the advisory panel in the future.

An inexorably long video of the meeting can be found here.  https://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/advisory-committee-calendar/vaccines-and-related-biological-products-advisory-committee-september-17-2021-meeting-announcement

I don't have 8 hours to spare but I dipped in at some critical stages.  I only had an hour so if anyone else spots interesting snippets , please share. But here is what I found interesting.

If you want to drop in to watch some interesting Q& A. I think it is interesting to listen/watch from 2 hrs.05 mins to 2.10  for 5 minutes.....when Michael Kurilla and Ofer Levy are quizzing the Israeli scientists. I think it is quite easy for the lay person to understand.

Pfizer badly mismanaged their time during their presentation and clearly irritated the chairman who tried to shut them down at 3.12.30 and finally just cut them off when they didnt stop.  I only caught the end of it but I thought the pfizer pitch was awful in terms of presentation quality.  The FDA DR Lee who came next was much better.

The public hearings were fun with both passionate supporters, some thoughtful skeptics and some nutty anti-vaxxers.

Dr Levy from MIT was the most critical of the Israeli research.

A doctor from Lousiana did a brilliant job on vaccine hesitancy He supports vaccination but pointed out that many of the questions that the vaccine hesitant are asking are not wrong .....  He was basically pleading for better data to help make a better case for vaccination. I think he was round 4:15.

Steve Kirsch (total charlatan) snuck in and claimed "no conflict".  Where we all know he has invested heavily in alternate treatments to Covid including ivermectin and is anti-vaccine.

Then at the end the panel members discuss the evidence they had heard,

I recommend dipping in at 6 (hrs) 16 (mins) 55 (secs) and listening to Dr Offis from U Penn. He gives a very articulate and well argued summation of why he voted the way he did . If you only have 5 minutes it is worthwhile.

There was a general criticism that needed more data, especially with regard to (i) Is the 2 dose vaccine truly fading in younger populations (ii) Myocarditis resulting from booster shot.

6:30 is Dr Rubin summed up an important point that recurred from many panel members. Worth listening to.

6:45 50 is Dr Portnoy who was one of two in favor of broader roll out. Makes a good point about mucousal disease

I also listened to the vote and overall I was very impressed by the discussion. its worth noting that the 2nd vote was nearly for 60 and older and probably would have passed at that age but the FDA phrased the question at 65 and high risk to obtain a unanimous vote because Dr Offis advocated 65 but 60 would have passed.

They then did a straw poll to see if healthcare workers qualify as "at high risk"

Then refined it to include a broad definition of "Should healthcare workers or others at high risk for occupational exposure be included in this EUA"?   It passed unanimously. 18:0

This got no coverage in the press.

The ctee effectively included those with occupational exposure in the group where benefits outweigh the risks, This occurred right at the end of the meeting around the 8 hour mark

 

 

The materials are also worth looking at but that is another post.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read the FDA presentation and the Israeli presentation.  I have listened to an hour or more of the meeting.

 I have come to a personal decision on the booster. I am not going to share it at this time because I think it is a personal decision and folks should do their own research. 

If I was a healthy male under 23 (which I am not), I would possibly wait for more data before getting a booster shot at this stage. If I was over 60 (which I am not) then I would seriously consider a booster shot.

If you are unvaccinated at this stage, I would recommend a resort vacation in Afghanistan or the beaches of Northern Mozambique. Both offer outstanding value and you are most unlikely to die of Covid.

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

I have read the FDA presentation and the Israeli presentation.  I have listened to an hour or more of the meeting.

 I have come to a personal decision on the booster. I am not going to share it at this time because I think it is a personal decision and folks should do their own research. 

If I was a healthy male under 23 (which I am not), I would possibly wait for more data before getting a booster shot at this stage. If I was over 60 (which I am not) then I would seriously consider a booster shot.

Age and the immunocompromised aside - another consideration is which vaccine you've had.

According to this article: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/big-gap-between-pfizer-moderna-034719881.html

Moderna remains around 92% effective at preventing serious illness after 120 days while Pfizer drops to 77%.

The article says a dose of Moderna has 100 micrograms of vaccine while the Pfizer has 30 micrograms.

Almost sounds like a single dose of Moderna is like getting a booster - timing aside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone messaged me in a very amicable way to ask about my decision on the booster, and noted that forum members who argued about the vaccine and then declined to say whether they have been vaccinated or not, lacked some credibility in his eyes.

So okay, I will explain the reasons for my decision regarding the booster shot, on the basis that it was a personal decision and everyone will have to take their own decisions.

I am going to schedule a booster shot.  I am a healthy white female over 50. I exercise, am in good physical shape, and no comorbid conditions. My reasons for a booster shot are :-

1. I was vaccinated in December/January and thus if the vaccine wanes, I am in the cohort that should get a booster

2. As a health worker, I fit the description of the FDA advisory panel of at risk due to occupational exposure.  Although I do not treat infectious disease, I am regularly in the hospital . I cannot  work from home. I come into close contact with approximately 25 patients a day  comprising probably 80 + different individuals a week. A number of my patients test positive , when we test them prior to surgery so I know I am exposed. One of my team members was fully vaccinated at the same time as me and tested positive last week, involving her taking 10 days off work to quarantine. While we were able to continue treating patients and operating on patients in her absence, that would not be possible if I was absent . 

3. I feel a strong sense of fiduciary duty to keep myself well so that I can attend to my patients.  It is not only about providing patients with a safe environment. If I was absent, the patients would either have to risk postponing surgery....which in many cases would not be safe... or be referred to someone else (which is what I would recommend).  I owe it to my patients, to take steps within reason to avoid this happening.

4. I tolerated the first vaccine shots well.  I am not in the age and gender cohort at risk from myocardia.

5. I found the evidence presented by the FDA and the Israeli scientists to the panel to indicate that the first round of vaccination waned. There are other vaccines  which behave simarily where the protocol is 2 shots in the first month and then a booster shot 3 -6 months later.  I want to be fully protected.

6. I love my husband very much. He is older than me and I do not wish to put him at risk.  

7. I will be travelling next month to Europe. I want to be as safe as I can on flights. 

8. VAMS screwed up my vaccination record. They only recorded the first shot.  I need to prove to customs in Europe that I am vaccinated. Its easier to get the third shot than pester VAMS to correct their error.   

9. I believe that the booster shot will strengthen my immunity and the risks of Adverse side effects are minimal.

One of my reservation is that I was vaccinated with Moderna and some suggest that it is holding up better than Pfizer. Moderna has not completed its booster shot trials, and I would usually want to wait until the data is available. 

Many of these reasons only apply to me. So before the anti-vaxxers start spitting in fury....it is a personal decision. I am going to a colleague for a check up before I finally commit. 

  

  

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

Someone messaged me in a very amicable way to ask about my decision on the booster, and noted that forum members who argued about the vaccine and then declined to say whether they have been vaccinated or not, lacked some credibility in his eyes.

So okay, I will explain the reasons for my decision regarding the booster shot, on the basis that it was a personal decision and everyone will have to take their own decisions.

I am going to schedule a booster shot.  I am a healthy white female over 50. I exercise, am in good physical shape, and no comorbid conditions. My reasons for a booster shot are :-

1. I was vaccinated in December/January and thus if the vaccine wanes, I am in the cohort that should get a booster

2. As a health worker, I fit the description of the FDA advisory panel of at risk due to occupational exposure.  Although I do not treat infectious disease, I am regularly in the hospital . I cannot  work from home. I come into close contact with approximately 25 patients a day  comprising probably 80 + different individuals a week. A number of my patients test positive , when we test them prior to surgery so I know I am exposed. One of my team members was fully vaccinated at the same time as me and tested positive last week, involving her taking 10 days off work to quarantine. While we were able to continue treating patients and operating on patients in her absence, that would not be possible if I was absent . 

3. I feel a strong sense of fiduciary duty to keep myself well so that I can attend to my patients.  It is not only about providing patients with a safe environment. If I was absent, the patients would either have to risk postponing surgery....which in many cases would not be safe... or be referred to someone else (which is what I would recommend).  I owe it to my patients, to take steps within reason to avoid this happening.

4. I tolerated the first vaccine shots well.  I am not in the age and gender cohort at risk from myocardia.

5. I found the evidence presented by the FDA and the Israeli scientists to the panel to indicate that the first round of vaccination waned. There are other vaccines  which behave simarily where the protocol is 2 shots in the first month and then a booster shot 3 -6 months later.  I want to be fully protected.

6. I love my husband very much. He is older than me and I do not wish to put him at risk.  

7. I will be travelling next month to Europe. I want to be as safe as I can on flights. 

8. VAMS screwed up my vaccination record. They only recorded the first shot.  I need to prove to customs in Europe that I am vaccinated. Its easier to get the third shot than pester VAMS to correct their error.   

9. I believe that the booster shot will strengthen my immunity and the risks of Adverse side effects are minimal.

One of my reservation is that I was vaccinated with Moderna and some suggest that it is holding up better than Pfizer. Moderna has not completed its booster shot trials, and I would usually want to wait until the data is available. 

Many of these reasons only apply to me. So before the anti-vaxxers start spitting in fury....it is a personal decision. I am going to a colleague for a check up before I finally commit. 

  

  

So you are getting the third booster shot.  Will you make this mandatory in your employment policy?

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

So you are getting the third booster shot.  Will you make this mandatory in your employment policy?

I have to laugh at how easy it is to spot silly liars on here.  She didn't listen to the meeting or read the transcript, is not an expert on the topic, but is making a decision contrary to the expert panel and recommending a path the panel rejected.  And has already stated she has forced her view on her staff.  Typical for the type.

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

I have to laugh at how easy it is to spot silly liars on here.  She didn't listen to the meeting or read the transcript, is not an expert on the topic, but is making a decision contrary to the expert panel and recommending a path the panel rejected.  And has already stated she has forced her view on her staff.  Typical for the type.

I wouldn't like to comment on her motives however I have found her to be quite reasonable when challenging her on data and facts.  That said it seems odd that she says she hasn't listened to ALL of the meeting recording BUT can quote specific times that we should listen.  Places where she CHOSE to "dip in".  That's part of the problem with the whole debate in that it is very easy to selectively choose which science supports your position.  

The FDA made a decision on ALL the evidence with the quantum leading them nearly unanimously to their decision.

Using @EYESAILOR's approach I could "dip in" at key points and extract quotes that paint a completely different position to hers.  At the end of the day the FDA are charged with reviewing the evidence and making a decision based on science and health reasons NOT politics.

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

I have to laugh at how easy it is to spot silly liars on here.  She didn't listen to the meeting or read the transcript, is not an expert on the topic, but is making a decision contrary to the expert panel and recommending a path the panel rejected.  And has already stated she has forced her view on her staff.  Typical for the type.

Why are you two being dicks? She said her decision to get the booster was a personal one. She has not "forced" her view on anyone. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are "boosters" that may or may not be identical to first doses and "third shots."  @EYESAILOR  is waiting for a Moderna booster decision by CDC. The panel agreed in principle to boosters for healthcare workers but didn't vote. It's moot for @EYESAILOR anyhow because they were discussing Pfizer boosters.

I fail to see how any choice she's making is contrary to the expert panel. She's not getting a "third shot." 

I myself got a "third shot" of Moderna. I suspect the "booster" might be different in dose but that's a guess. Each shot kicked ass for me. 

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

But she will sack anyone who isn't vaccinated - the question is will she apply the same policy to those who don't get the "booster"?

Why do you care? Maybe her practice will require it, maybe not. 

If it aint race/age/sex/orientation/etc - then she can fire any she wants, at any time, for any reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you will reconsider in several month if the data on safety and efficacy warrant.  I mean, if unboosted is highly likely to get infected that kind of obviates having vaccinated healthcare staff from that point on.   

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

I wouldn't like to comment on her motives however I have found her to be quite reasonable when challenging her on data and facts.  That said it seems odd that she says she hasn't listened to ALL of the meeting recording BUT can quote specific times that we should listen.  Places where she CHOSE to "dip in".  That's part of the problem with the whole debate in that it is very easy to selectively choose which science supports your position.  

The FDA made a decision on ALL the evidence with the quantum leading them nearly unanimously to their decision.

Using @EYESAILOR's approach I could "dip in" at key points and extract quotes that paint a completely different position to hers.  At the end of the day the FDA are charged with reviewing the evidence and making a decision based on science and health reasons NOT politics.

KSB,

I largely agree with your criticism. I am simply too busy to spend 8 hours watching a meeting. However, with the agenda in hand I selected parts of the meeting to watch. I have watched more subsequently.  I deliberately focused on the Q and A, and some of the speakers presenting alternative views  (for example the professor from MIT) because I was doing some research on my own behalf.  If I am getting a booster shot, I genuinely want to understand the benefits AND risks. I wasnt watching it for you lot!  I was almost more interested in the criticism of Pfizer than I was in the benefits.  This is my health and I want to understand the issues.

Wess claims that he has watched the entire meeting. Maybe he has. But he seems blissfully unaware of some of the key topics of debate . Score me skeptical.  He refers to the transcript but is unable to post a link.   I am never sure with Wess.

I also agree with you that the FDA are charged with making decisions based on science and health , not politics  I was reassuringly impressed  by the senior FDA staff. Towards the end of the session, the panel chair asked Dr Marks (FDA Director) if the panel should base their votes on the materials presented by the FDA and accompanying presentations  or if they could consider and discuss wider information. Dr. Marks emphasized that this was a scientific meeting and was not bound by legal rules of evidence and that as scientists they should include the totality of information. The panel asked if they had to vote on the exact question posed to them. Dr. Gruber from the FDA suggested that they should vote on that question because Pfizer had submitted a an application and the panel should give their advice on that application , but that the panel could and should phrase any further questions for vote that they considered relevant. Thus the recommendation that older and at risk cohorts should get the vaccine was at the behest of the panel.  I really got the impression that the FDA was focused on the  science.    

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

Maybe you will reconsider in several month if the data on safety and efficacy warrant.  I mean, if unboosted is highly likely to get infected that kind of obviates having vaccinated healthcare staff from that point on.   

Clew,   My staff and I will always reconsider our position as data becomes available. We will also take into account the safety of our patients. To be honest, I havent told my staff of my decision yet (because it is not final until my check up) which is one of the reasons to remain anonymous. At this stage, If any of my staff choose to get boosted, then that will be their decision and theirs alone.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites