Jump to content
Gordo

Just curious, anyone have a plan, or preps for global pandemic?

Covid-19 Vaccine Survey  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. Your Vaccine Status is:

    • Fully vaccinated
      21
    • Partially vaccinated
      0
    • Not Vaccinated
      5
  2. 2. If not (fully) vaccinated, your reason(s) for your decision (check all that apply):

    • Not Applicable - I'm vaccinated
      20
    • The rapid vaccine development process makes me distrust them
      3
    • I'm worried about vaccine side effects
      4
    • I don't think I'm at much risk of getting a covid infection
      3
    • I don't believe a covid infection is a serious risk for someone like me
      4
    • I'm waiting until the vaccines receive final approval
      0
    • Fear of needles
      0
    • A medical condition prevents me from getting vaccines
      0
    • Bad reaction to the first dose of the covid vaccine
      0
    • I already had COVID-19 and don't think I need the vaccine for protection
      2
    • Vaccine not available where I live
      0
  3. 3. Are you OK with having your CR forum name included on a list of members who have/haven't chosen to be vaccinated?

    • Yes
      23
    • No
      3


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Saul said:

Yes, Comrade McCoy?

LOL, in the places and times of Stalin either you played the part of the loyal comrade/Tovarich or you went under a few feet of fresh soil. And there was no guarantee that you didn't hit the subsoil even if loyal; longevity of teh citizens was not a priority of that regime.

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the CDC's study highlights for me... and one of the most important results to consider:

..hospitalization rates were 19.8-fold lower (95% CI = 18.2–21.4) among vaccinated persons without a previous COVID-19 diagnosis, 55.3-fold lower (95% CI = 27.3–83.3) among unvaccinated persons with a previous COVID-19 diagnosis, and 57.5-fold lower (95% CI = 29.2–85.8) among vaccinated persons with a previous COVID-19 diagnosis."

A vaccine on top of previous infection was only marginally better. The risk / benefit calculation should be different for someone who already has some immunity like myself. And of course I have no health conditions, much healthier than the average person my age, I eat very healthily, fitness level is good and BMI is low. And Omicron is 90% less likely to cause hospitalizations because it's intrinsically less virulent.

I still don't see a good reason to get vaccinated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Meat Loaf died Thursday night. Sources with knowledge tell TMZ ... he was supposed to attend a business dinner earlier this week for a show he's working on -- "I'd Do Anything for Love" -- but the dinner was canceled because he became seriously ill with COVID. Sources tell us that condition quickly became critical.
Our sources say Meat Loaf has been outspoken about COVID, railing with folks in Australia recently about vaccine mandates."
https://www.tmz.com/2022/01/21/meat-loaf-dead-dies-singer/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_Out_of_Hell indeed.

Share this post


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

"Meat Loaf died Thursday night. Sources with knowledge tell TMZ ... he was supposed to attend a business dinner earlier this week for a show he's working on -- "I'd Do Anything for Love" -- but the dinner was canceled because he became seriously ill with COVID. Sources tell us that condition quickly became critical.
Our sources say Meat Loaf has been outspoken about COVID, railing with folks in Australia recently about vaccine mandates."
https://www.tmz.com/2022/01/21/meat-loaf-dead-dies-singer/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_Out_of_Hell indeed.

The Incredible power of vaccines! 
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/01/21/covid-omicron-variant-live-updates/
 

So Sad, I loved his music. See above article on the incredible power of vaccines especially for people over 65 like Meatloaf. He would very likely still be with us if he had vaccinated. 
 

Unvaccinated adults age 65 or older who contracted the coronavirus were 49 times more likely to require hospitalization than seniors who had received booster vaccine doses, according to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

and for those 50-64 :  Meanwhile, unvaccinated people between 50 and 64 years old were 44 times more likely to need hospitalization compared with their boosted counterparts

Edited by Mike41

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Matt said:

And Omicron is 90% less likely to cause hospitalizations because it's intrinsically less virulent.

This seems to be uncertain. If the percentage is referred to whole populations, then it may be that it acted on mostly vaccinated people, or on unvaccinated but young people, or on previously infected people... How likely is omicron to cause hospitalization and death in the set of unvaccinated and uninfected people, and in the various age subsets and in the comorbidity subset...

The fact that this variant came around a couple of years after the first wave may pose a strong bias on the  hypothesis of its lesser pathogenicity.

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opposite:  arriving later suggests that it should be: more infectious, and LESS deadly (which is exactly what has happened).

Why?

Because the virus's evolution drives it towards surviving to produce more offspring -- hence more infectious (the more people infected, the more virus) -- and less deadly (the longer the infected person lives, the more viruses).

  --  Saul

Share this post


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

This seems to be uncertain. If the percentage is referred to whole populations, then it may be that it acted on mostly vaccinated people, or on unvaccinated but young people, or on previously infected people... How likely is omicron to cause hospitalization and death in the set of unvaccinated and uninfected people, and in the various age subsets and in the comorbidity subset...

The fact that this variant came around a couple of years after the first wave may pose a strong bias on the  hypothesis of its lesser pathogenicity.

Here's some data from California for vaccinated, unvaccinated, people with co-morbidities, previously infected, etc. It seems all groups do better with Omicron. The paper the doctor is going through is here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.11.22269045v1.full-text

 

Edited by Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plant-based diets, pescatarian diets and COVID-19 severity: a population-based case–control study in six countries

"After adjusting for important confounders, participants who reported following ‘plant-based diets’ and ‘plant-based diets or pescatarian diets’ had 73% (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.81) and 59% (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.99) lower odds of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 severity, respectively, compared with participants who did not follow these diets. 

https://nutrition.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/18/bmjnph-2021-000272

plant based diet covid.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AlanPater said:

Yes I saw it but a few points Al.

1. Vaccines only provide protection from infection for a few weeks; one would need to be vaccinated every 3-4 months. I'm not doing that. I will almost certainly be exposed to Omicron if I haven't already. I've been in contact with people who had it, but I've not been sick or had any symptoms as of yet. I seem to be holding up pretty well despite everyone catching Omicron around me. 

2. As the CDC study shows, people with immunity from previous infection had a very good protection from severe disease against Delta compared to vaccinated. People who were vaccinated on top of naturally acquired immunity only did marginally better. Isn't this the most important point? 

3. In the CDC study, they are also looking at the general population. The general population have high BMI's, largely eat a terrible diet, almost certainly worse biomarkers and risk factors than me (especially those in my age group, but even below). And yet they still did very well against reinfection by having immunity from previous infection. Also see study I posted above regarding plant-based diet and risk of severe COVID with earlier strains.

4. Give me a vaccine that doesn't wane after 3 months and I'll use it. Right now, the benefit vs the risk for me is not worth it. So what if the risk is 1 in 10,000 for myocarditis? I've been that 1 in 10,000 when I've taken other things. Remember I took Cipro, the risk of tendonitis was something like 1 or 2 in 10,000 people. I developed bilateral achilles tendonitis after a day. I also got peripheral neuropathy from it with a rate of 1 in 34,000 people getting the side effect.

Sure a vaccine is different, but based on my current health, my age (which is much younger biologically), the fact I already have some immunity already and is very protective against moderate or severe illness, my very healthy diet, and Omicron being intrinsically less virulent, it is rational in my opinion to just simply wait. I am not worried at all.

Edited by Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Matt said:

Plant-based diets, pescatarian diets and COVID-19 severity: a population-based case–control study in six countries

Nice results, but "case-control".

Share this post


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

Here's some data from California for vaccinated, unvaccinated, people with co-morbidities, previously infected, etc. It seems all groups do better with Omicron. The paper the doctor is going through is here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.11.22269045v1.full-text

Thanks for the link Matt, but I remain skeptical about a single preprint. The paper is without a peer review, it means without other experts examining it. I'm not a virologist so I'm not able to discern any potential wrong procedures or biases. I'll have to listen to the video and the opinions of the doctor may be valid only if he's qualified in the specific field. Unless I listen to a proper debate among qualified virologists who do not talk the party line, I cannot be sure the paper is representative. It may even be representative of the specific sample in S Cal, but non-representative of other population samples, I simply don't know and do not have the credentials to discuss it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, Matt said:

1. Vaccines only provide protection from infection for a few weeks; one would need to be vaccinated every 3-4 months. I'm not doing that. I will almost certainly be exposed to Omicron if I haven't already. I've been in contact with people who had it, but I've not been sick or had any symptoms as of yet. I seem to be holding up pretty well despite everyone catching Omicron around me. 

But, are we talking about the two-shots regular vaccination or the booster dose? The effect of vaccines on what is called the neutralizing antibodies titer wanes after 2-3 months, whereas the effect of vaccines on T and Bcells wanes after years or decades. So, the concept of boosting to protect from infections would require probably 4 booster doses per year, whereas protection from serious sickness would require only a regular 2-shots vaccination cycle (or possibly a third shot if the first two have been too closely spaced).

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


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

Sure a vaccine is different, but based on my current health, my age (which is much younger biologically), the fact I already have some immunity already and is very protective against moderate or severe illness, my very healthy diet, and Omicron being intrinsically less virulent, it is rational in my opinion to just simply wait. I am not worried at all.

I would wait as well, it's just the paranoia of governments that has infected the science more than SARSCOV2 infected the population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, mccoy said:

I would wait as well, it's just the paranoia of governments that has infected the science more than SARSCOV2 infected the population.

While science has been politicized before, mostly by the Left, Covid took it to a new level. Everyone today has forgotten that the basis for the initial calls for lockdowns in the West was that "Covid IS NOT infectious" and therefore it can be stopped by following the Chinese example:

"On Monday, Tedros said, “We have never seen before a respiratory pathogen that’s capable of community transmission but at the same time which can also be contained with the right measures. If this was an influenza epidemic, we would have expected to see widespread community transmission across the globe by now and efforts to slow it down or contain it would not be feasible.

People should try to protect themselves individually from flu strains, said Mike Ryan, the head of the WHO’s emergencies program, but at a societal and global level, “we don’t necessarily attempt to contain or stop them because we fundamentally believe they will spread unabated.”

Everyone has forgotten that the broad consensus among the medical community, based on studies going back to the 1950s, was that masks worn by healthy people do not prevent community transmission of respiratory diseases. As soon as the Left made it into a political litmus test and a tribal identification of "the good," and its Twitter mobs destroyed the careers of those who objected, the medical establishment fell in line.

The decade leading to Covid was already showing that Russian and Chinese disinformation campaigns were effective in polarizing and destabilizing the Western democracies, by reimagining Marxism along tribal lines and targeting education, and government and private institutions. Covid was the spark that lit the pyre, and the fear it created was channeled by political opportunists to attempt to topple the foundations of the West's liberal institutions.

Democracy is but a rare blip in human history, and it is often suffocated by forces within. I hope we are not witnessing the end of such a blip.

As to Covid, it's a bad bug. We've had them before, and worse, and will have them again. The reaction to Covid is far more dangerous than the virus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Office for National statistics UK Government report backs up the latest CDC study showing that immunity from prior infection was significantly more protective than vaccination (even boosted).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveycharacteristicsofpeopletestingpositiveforcovid19uk/19january2022

January 19 2022.

FJdtVt0XwAA4OkO.png

Edited by Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm seeing that the estimates are related to the likelihood of testing positive for coronavirus COVID-19-

But that's either little relevant, or improperly put.

We are not concerned with the likelihood of testing positive, rather with the likelihood of severe sickness related to the infection.

As known, likelyhood of testing positive also depends upon the test and upon the times the test has been cycled. When the RNA test is cycled more than 30 times it can pick up viral inactive RNA residuals and debris which are reported as infection even if they are not.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airborne transmission of COVID-19 and the role of face mask to prevent it: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Tabatabaeizadeh SA.
Eur J Med Res. 2021 Jan 2;26(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s40001-020-00475-6.
PMID: 33388089 Free PMC article.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7776300/
The result of this meta-analysis has shown significant reduction in infection with face mask use; the pooled RR (95%CI) was 0.12 [0.06, 0.27] (P < 0.001).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://peterattiamd.com/why-im-for-covid-vaccines-but-against-vaccine-mandates/?utm_source=weekly-newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=220123-NL-vaccinemandates&amp;utm_content=220123-NL-vaccinemandates-email-nonsubs

In the above link, Dr Peter Attia gives an interesting concise summary on the effectiveness of vaccines, natural immunity and why mandates are useless at best.

He cites the Kaiser Permanente study according to which Omicron is less 'virulent' (pathogenicity would be a more appropriate term). With all the respect I have for Peter Attia, he's not a virologist so I still cannot conclude Omicron is significantly less pathogenic than delta in all populations.

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mccoy said:

With all the respect I have for Peter Attia

Not related to vaccines, but:

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&amp;q=Peter+Attia

What does Peter Attia eat?
 
 
I consume only modest amounts of fruit (one serving per day, at most, and only in the form of berries, which contain the least amount of fructose). I eat vegetables, but primarily because they are a great way to get more fat (e.g., high-fat salad dressings, butter), not because I “need” them.Dec 19, 2011

Share this post


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

Office for National statistics UK Government report backs up the latest CDC study showing that immunity from prior infection was significantly more protective than vaccination (even boosted).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveycharacteristicsofpeopletestingpositiveforcovid19uk/19january2022

It seems to me that the value of vaccines in other reports are much better than in this report and this report does not address the important issue of serious infections.

Vaccines are the safe and effective way to deal with COVID-19 risk.  Infections are dangerous and have much greater side effects, such as long-COVID, versus vaccines.

Real-world effectiveness of the mRNA-1273 vaccine against COVID-19: Interim results from a prospective observational cohort study.

Bruxvoort KJ, Sy LS, Qian L, Ackerson BK, Luo Y, Lee GS, Tian Y, Florea A, Takhar HS, Tubert JE, Talarico CA, Tseng HF. Lancet Reg Health Am. 2021 Nov 25:100134. doi: 10.1016/j.lana.2021.100134. Online ahead of print. PMID: 34849505 Free PMC article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some info on the new BA.2 variant of Omicron that has begun rapidly outcompeting the original Omicron BA.1 in places like Denmark that do a lot of genetic sequencing. Their health minister reports that it appears able to reinfect individuals who just recently recovered from the original BA.1 Omicron variant, so this may cause a 2nd peak of covid cases here in the coming months. Keep an eye on it...

 

Also a tweet from someone else who did a good job of predicting the competitive growth advantage of the original Omicron vs Delta, is now predicting this BA.2 variant may have a further 80 to 100% advantage over Omicron BA.1, not clear yet due to inherent transmissibility or via more complete immune system evasion than Omicron BA.1.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting to hear anyone in my government and/or large corporations here in the USA mention "hey, maybe we should like, I dunno, actually do something about fixing the indoor ventilation problem?" This and all other airborne viruses will continue to endlessly spread and mutate and infect folks until we do a better job of filtering/cleaning our indoor air. It's a fundamentally broken part of our building codes/infrastructure IMO. And so far not a peep about it, even from "smart" companies like the tech giants, other than "we expect our employees back in the office soon." Where's the leadership on this issue?

 

There are new technologies like far-UV indoor lighting that might be able to accomplish the inactivation of indoor air viruses:

 

Far-UVC light (222 nm) efficiently and safely inactivates airborne human coronaviruses

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-67211-2

Share this post


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

It seems to me that the value of vaccines in other reports are much better than in this report and this report does not address the important issue of serious infections.

Vaccines are the safe and effective way to deal with COVID-19 risk.  Infections are dangerous and have much greater side effects, such as long-COVID, versus vaccines.

I heard about a CDC study carried out in a small city in the USA, with a pretty biased population. Maybe it's that one, I agree that the effect of vaccines would seem a little too small compared to the majority of reports. This of course does not mean that a natural infection bestows no protection.

Share this post


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

I consume only modest amounts of fruit (one serving per day, at most, and only in the form of berries, which contain the least amount of fructose). I eat vegetables, but primarily because they are a great way to get more fat (e.g., high-fat salad dressings, butter), not because I “need” them.Dec 19, 2011

I agree that what he wrote is awfully biased, but that was 10 years ago when he followed a strict ketogenic diet and followed a strict keto narrative. But he changed idea apparently.

Presently he underlines that he eats once or twice a day, starting with a huge bowl of mixed salad and that the main reason why he quit the keto diet was the fact that he could not eat more vegetables without going out of ketosis. 

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

×