Jump to content

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


Covid-19 Vaccine Survey  

30 members have voted

  1. 1. Your Vaccine Status is:

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

    • Not Applicable - I'm vaccinated
    • The rapid vaccine development process makes me distrust them
    • I'm worried about vaccine side effects
    • I don't think I'm at much risk of getting a covid infection
    • I don't believe a covid infection is a serious risk for someone like me
    • I'm waiting until the vaccines receive final approval
    • Fear of needles
    • A medical condition prevents me from getting vaccines
    • Bad reaction to the first dose of the covid vaccine
    • I already had COVID-19 and don't think I need the vaccine for protection
    • Vaccine not available where I live
  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
    • No

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Todd Allen said:

Of course the Amish had their best economic year, they largely make and sell furniture and food, two things in extremely high demand during the pandemic.  Big Lots also had their best year ever, by pivoting to selling furniture, haha.  Letting everyone just get the covid is great if you don't mind killing off your elders (I guess killing off the elders is actually pretty good from a financial/business/productivity perspective ;).


Death and religion: ‘Excess deaths’ sweep through Amish and Mennonite communities during COVID-19 pandemic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

12 hours ago, AlanPater said:

The article title in the URL pretty well tells where the article is going. 

The risk of death in the acquisition of natural immunity is vastly greater than that in the acquisition of vaccine-acquired immunity.  Long-COVID effects are a risk seen only with natural acquired immunity.  There are suggestions that getting COVID might lead to "post-COVID" conditions analogous to those of post-polio syndrome.  Who likes getting sick, anyway.?

People who have had COVID are much less dangerous to the public when they have been vaccinated.

Get vaccinated.

It's not actually what most of the data suggests though... The majority of the studies I've seen are showing that vaccinated are more likely to be infected and far more likely to be symptomatic compared to people who've been previously infected. Meaning, acquired immunity from infection is more protective. I also see it here, most of the people that have had COVID locally have been vaccinated, but I can't think of one person who has recovered from COVID already and been reinfected.

People who have not had COVID before, yes, they should probably get the vaccine. And people who are old and have health conditions and have not had COVID before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New study in Nature

Research finds different antibody responses following COVID vaccination and natural infection

"As reported earlier, at 1.3 months post booster dose, the binding to neutralizing serum titers was higher in vaccinated individuals when compared to convalescent patients, but this difference in effect disappeared at later time intervals".

Memory antibodies from convalescent individuals show more improved affinity and neutralization breadth post-infection than in case of COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations

Affinities of pairs of antibodies from persisting clones obtained at 1.3 and 5 months post booster showed a 4.5 fold increase in affinity, while in the case of convalescent individuals, antibodies from persisting clones obtained at 1.3 and 6.2 months after symptom onset showed an 11.2 fold increase in affinity.

In convalescent individuals, it had been found that the neutralizing breadth of antibodies from memory cells increases along with their potencies over time. The neutralizing potential of antibodies obtained at prime and 1.3  months post-vaccination were tested against a panel of pseudotypes encoding RBD mutations. It was found that there was only a small change in breadth and an increase in resistance to K417N and A475V substitutions. It was found that there was a little increase in neutralizing breath during the post-vaccination period of mRNA vaccines when compared to a similar period post-COVID-19 infection in convalescent individuals.



Edited by Matt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trying to get political, but remember when a certain controversial politician suggested internal UV light as a possible covid treatment and he promptly recived widespread condemnation and ridicule?  WOW I was surprised to stumble upon the following today (from last July), some researchers actually tried this crazy idea and it may actually work! 


Reduced Viral Loads Seen in COVID-19 Patients Treated With UVA Light

Ali Rezaie, MD, in his lab at Cedars-Sinai. Photo by Cedars-Sinai.
Ali Rezaie, MD, in his lab at Cedars-Sinai. Photo by Cedars-Sinai.

Cedars-Sinai Research Involving Five Critically Ill Patients is Encouraging and Warrants Further Investigation, Scientists Say

Ultraviolet light treatments introduced into the tracheas of five critically ill COVID-19 patients appeared to be safe and associated with a reduction in the respiratory load of SARS-CoV-2—the virus responsible for COVID-19—in all but one patient, according to a study conducted by Cedars-Sinai.

The findings, published in the peer-reviewed journal Advances in Therapy, were based on five days of 20-minute treatments with ultraviolet A (UVA) light using a catheter inserted into the patients' tracheas. Patients were followed for 30 days. The findings were based on four patients; the fifth patient had no detectable levels of SARS-CoV-2 at the study outset.

The research indicated that the reduced viral loads appeared to be associated with improvement in the patients' clinical conditions as measured by a standard scale used by the World Health Organization. The investigators emphasized the preliminary nature of their research, noting that they did not demonstrate a causal link between the improvement in patient conditions and the reduced viral loads.

"Although our study suggested that ultraviolet A light may be useful in treating COVID-19, further investigation is needed to determine whether this approach can improve clinical outcomes," said Ali Rezaie, MD, FRCP(C), medical director of GI Motility at Cedars-Sinai and the study's corresponding author.

Rezaie, an associate professor of Medicine, explained that the study was limited by the small sample size and the fact that the natural history of SARS-CoV-2 levels in the respiratory tracts of COVID-19 intensive care patients is not well understood. Larger studies that include a control group are needed to further gauge the effects of UVA light treatment and to explore the mechanism of these effects, he added.

The study was led by investigators from the Medically Associated Science and Technology (MAST) Program, including Rezaie; MAST program director Mark Pimentel, MD, FRCP(C), professor of Medicine; Ruchi Mathur, MD, FRCP(C), professor of Medicine; Gil Melmed, MD, professor of Medicine; George Chaux, MD, professor of Medicine; and Gabriela Leite, PhD, project scientist.

Also contributing were other investigators from the Cedars-Sinai Department of Medicine, including Division of General Internal Medicine; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine; and Division of Infectious Diseases.

Although UVA light phototherapy has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to treat several dermatological diseases, it has not yet been approved for internal use.

The Advances in Therapy study builds on earlier research by the Cedars-Sinai investigative team, performed using laboratory mice and laboratory cultured human cells, suggesting that UVA light could, under certain conditions, reduce the levels of certain bacteria and viruses that are similar to SARS-CoV-2 without harming the human cells.

Funding: This investigator-initiated study was sponsored by Aytu BioPharma. 

Disclosures: Rezaie, Pimentel, Melmed, Mathur and Leite are inventors on patent applications filed by Cedars-Sinai Medical Center related to the device (internal ultraviolet therapy) being used in this study. These patent applications are exclusively licensed by Cedars-Sinai to Aytu BioPharma, Inc. for endotracheal and nasopharyngeal use only; under the license, Cedars-Sinai has the right to receive royalties from Aytu BioPharma, and the inventors have the right to receive a portion of those royalties from Cedars-Sinai. None of the study authors receives a salary or consulting fees from Aytu BioPharma, and neither the study authors nor Cedars-Sinai have any equity, shares, or options in Aytu BioPharma.


Cross reference: “So, supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light — and, I think you said that that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it,” he said. “And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way, and I think you said you’re going to test that, too. It sounds interesting.”


Also even more recent data has analyzed and found a UV wavelength that is very effective at killing covid but NOT harmful for human exposure, see: Specific wavelength of UV light is safe and effective way to kill SARS-CoV-2 virus

"A specific wavelength of ultraviolet (UV) light is not only extremely effective at killing the virus which causes COVID-19, but is also safer for use in public spaces, finds new University of Colorado Boulder research.

"The study, published this month in Applied and Environmental Microbiology, is the first to comprehensively analyze the effects of different wavelengths of UV light on SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses, including the only wavelength safer for living beings to be exposed to without protection.

"The findings, which the authors refer to as a "game changer" for UV light use, could lead to new affordable, safe and highly effective systems for reducing viral spread in crowded public spaces like airports and concert venues."

Edited by Gordo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Saul said:

Hi Matt!

I just had my Pfizer booster shot.


  -- Saul

Good for you! 🙂 I think for much older people, it might be worth it, as I said! 

1 hour ago, AlanPater said:

... and all unvaccinated workers represent and clear and present danger to co-workers and should be removed from their jobs.  Labor laws clearly dictate worker safety from work-related dangers.

I think it's a bit of an irrational and illogical position based on the data. This should be about who is "immune" not who is vaccinated or not. The vast majority of the current data shows that previously infected induces stronger immunity than vaccination. This is what the science is. And as someone who is always into the science, your response is surprising.

But maybe not a surprise... people have become completely irrational lately. 

I have had an antibody test, it's 80.4 u/mL back in August (as I showed you in this thread). It shows I have immunity even though I got COVID in Oct 2020. It's completely reasonable for me to not get the vaccine. Just as one does not need a chickenpox or measles vaccine if you've already had the infection. The point now is preventing serious illness, which natural infection or vaccine should do for *years*.

At 37 minutes, Dr. Paul Offit (vaccine co-inventor and member of the FDA Vaccine Advisory Committee) states that natural immunity is robust and protects you against serious illness. And he states that it is *reasonable* to simply rely on natural immunity and using antibody tests to prove you're immune.

The main issue is logistically, bureaucratically, it's a "nightmare" to implement. It's not that natural immunity isn't good enough.

Large-scale study of antibody titer decay following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine or SARS-CoV-2 infection

"Conclusions: This study demonstrates individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine have different kinetics of antibody levels compared to patients who had been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, with higher initial levels but a much faster exponential decrease in the first group."



Edited by Matt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't use chickenpox or measles as a model for developing expectations regarding durability of immunity post-covid infection. A better idea is to model those expectations after the behavior of the human body to similar coronaviruses. Here is a recent study that did just that, using various parts of the sars-cov-2 virus, and finding the most similar other viruses, and then developing a range of expected reinfection probability, which to sum up is:


"Reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 under endemic conditions would likely occur between 3 months and 5·1 years after peak antibody response, with a median of 16 months. This protection is less than half the duration revealed for the endemic coronaviruses circulating among humans"


So unless you want to risk getting reinfected every 16 months on average, strongly consider an annual vaccination/booster.


The durability of immunity against reinfection by SARS-CoV-2: a comparative evolutionary study


Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2021 at 10:53 AM, AlanPater said:

... and all unvaccinated workers represent and clear and present danger to co-workers and should be removed from their jobs.  Labor laws clearly dictate worker safety from work-related dangers.

This makes no sense whatsoever. If the vaccines work well, as I believe they do at preventing hospitalization and death, then how are unvaccinated a "clear and present danger?!"  Among those younger than 20, the flu is a considerably greater threat than Covid. Are unvaccinated kids "clear and present danger" to their classmates? If not, why not, based on your logic?

This is a good example of how the politicization of the pandemic by the Left has, and continues to pay dividends: It has turned the more self-righteous into fierce Red Guards rising with religious fervor in defense of the Party narrative. It is not enough that they themselves believe and act accordingly, they want everyone else to believe, and want to destroy every last infidel who would not conform.

2 hours ago, BrianA said:

Ivermectin: How false science created a Covid 'miracle' drug


So, what's the point here? To bootstrap oneself into intellectual and moral superiority over those who believe in "false science?" Whatever "false science" actually means...

Ivermectin may or may not be beneficial. The actual "science" is inconclusive so far. If you get SARS and your doctor prescribes it to you, feel free to reject it. But why do you insist that others are not allowed to take it? Why are hospitals in some states refusing to administer it to dying patients whose personal physicians have prescribed it?

Yep, see above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope that once the madness subsides (hopefully, without dramatic changes to our society and political system), we can take a closer look at how Covid deaths were counted. The desire to take down Trump made the Left do a lot of things that were unthinkable a few years ago. Inflating the death toll to make the running ticker-tapes on our screens was nothing compared to the lockdowns, the mask branding, and now the vaccine mandates. And it will keep going, as long as it works for them.

Sharyl Attkisson: Serious Questions About The Way Covid Deaths Have Been Counted

"As hindsight comes into clearer focus, we're learning a lot about mistaken advice and policies amid the Covid-19 pandemic. One still murky and disputed area involves the death toll, now upwards of 640,000 in the U.S., according to CDC. Some insist the true count is much higher; others claim it's lower. Today, we begin with the startling results of our investigation that found in some documented cases, news that Covid was the cause of death was greatly exaggerated."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

] Attkisson has received criticism for publishing stories suggesting a possible link between vaccines and autism,[10][11][12] a claim that has been rejected by the scientific community.[13]

well Ron I’m not impressed with your source. She’s a long time anti vaccer. The above is from Wikipedia. OTOH, I AM RECEPTIVE TO BEING WARY OF WHAT SCIENCE TELLS US TO DO!! Read the story below. For years science has recommended aspirin for certain groups of people. Now they have reversed that recommendation. It’s just the REALITY OF HOW SCIENCE WORKS. just like the resistance of scientific reductionist materialism that has been wrong about the nature of reality. It takes time, sometimes decades. Science is full of holes and that’s just the way it is. So wrt these vaccines I gambled and got two moderna shots. I think it was a good choice but who knows. 



Edited by Mike41
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Economist reports their attempt to determine The pandemic’s true death toll

The summary is  Although the official number of deaths caused by covid-19 is now 4.9m, our single best estimate is that the actual toll is 16.3m people. We find that there is a 95% chance that the true value lies between 10.1m and 19.1m additional deaths.

The article provides links to their methodology, code, data, and models, if anyone wants to question their results.


The estimate vs official is actually pretty good for the US compared with other countries.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michigan is reporting K-12 schools without mask mandates in Michigan saw 62% more coronavirus spread

They found

The rate of infection reached an average of about 45 cases per 100,000 students by late September in school districts with mask mandates. 

Virus spread was 62% higher in school districts with no mask rules, where the infection rate averaged 73 cases per 100,000 by late September. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Todd Allen said:

Imagine how much more dead he would be if he had not been vaccinated.

Colin Powell, military leader and first Black US secretary of state, dies after complications from Covid-19

He was just one person; he was old; he had multiple myeloma; his treatment for the cancer made him immunocompromised to things like COVID.  Get vacccinated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

National Statistics' (ONS) UK government report 

"There was no evidence that the reduction in risk of infection from two doses of either vaccine differed from that of previous natural infection."

"Two vaccination doses provided a similar level of protection to previous natural infection during the Delta-dominant period"



same protection.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, I'm no more interested in data about vaccination. The evidence in my country, Italy, is in front of everyone's eyes. After vaccination has been made highly advisable or almost mandatory (or rigorously mandatory for many workers) all figures have drastically dropped. Very few covid19 deaths. Negligible hospitals occupancy. Economy booming back.

Data speak for themselves. At least here.

Now, I agree with the fact that the war has not been won yet. There is the real possibility of outbreaks of other more dangerous variants.

But right now, the evidence presently existing, is undeniable. Vaccines work, in Italy. Have things improved everywhere else? Have things worsened in some places? I don't know.

Should we throw away all worries? NO of course, but again, present evidence is manifestly visible.

Edited by mccoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DHL said:

But what if no one was vaccinated ? Would the results be the same ? As more people get the virus and recover, more people would then get natural immunity. Would everything the end turn out the same even without a “vaccine” ?

No.  There would be a monumental amount of more sickness and death without vaccines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Matt said:

You do not need to run the COVID gauntlet of a natural infection if you rely on vaccines for protection instead.  And what is missing from the data you present, Matt, is the much greater level of protection if the unfortunately infected subsequently or previously receive vaccination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, DHL said:

But what if no one was vaccinated ? Would the results be the same ? As more people get the virus and recover, more people would then get natural immunity. Would everything the end turn out the same even without a “vaccine” ?

I agree that at the end, probably everything would turn out the same, but time factor governs. At the end, with natural herd immunity developed, the western society might have almost collapsed, or poverty and riots being common. In countries like Africa, this experiment is under way, but outthere SARSCOV2 is probably the lesser evil, unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...