Coronavirus. The n(in)th sequel.

[amadeus]

Podcasters in a nutshell:

FDA, can’t be trusted. Joe Biden, can’t be trusted. Dr. Fauci, can’t be trusted. Drug companies, can’t be trusted.

CCP—crickets.

 

[warpus]

What is it with this "jab" thing? I always knew these as "vaccine shots" not jabs. When did this terminology change and why?

I don't really care tbh, but as long as we're asking questions

 

[El_Machinae]

Perhaps.

But it's a known vs an unknown. And many people would prefer to face a known risk especially w it being highly politicized.

Both risks are unknown.

There's actually a different bias at play here. We tend to prefer 'natural' injuries over 'man-caused' injuries (or accidental injuries over intentional injuries). They have different levels of salience, and different moral weighting.

Many people would prefer to get an 'accidental' injury rather than get a lighter 'intentional' injury. When it comes to the vaccine, people don't want to say "oh, I did this to myself" or "this was forced upon me". In comparison, if people's perceptions are set that way, they'll get sick and say "well, I tried, it was an accident". They'll forgive themselves, and subconsciously are predicting that when they do the risk analysis. They'd rather be able to forgive themselves rather than not, even if it increases the actual chance of injury.

It's also why there's disagreement regarding the behavior of the infectious. Some people see it as 'accidentally' infecting other people. Other people see it as intentionally engaging in risky behavior that will hurt others. Because of this perceptive difference, the moral weighting of the action is seen differently.

 

[Lexicus]

The problem is that every parent seems to think their kid is 1 in a million.

It's really the opposite. Every parent thinks 1 in a million is fine because their kid won't be the 1. As long as the 1 is some other person's kid, it's fine. No parent who says they are fine with their kid being the 1 is telling the truth, either.

 

[amadeus]

What is it with this "jab" thing?

I think it's UK/Australian English? I too always remember them being shots. Get your shots!

I remember getting them at either the doctor's office or at the school. I don't remember anybody complaining then about kids getting their shots at school; I guess back then dead kids wasn't the political hot-button issue it is today.

 

[El_Machinae]

There's a concerted effort in the antivax movement to stop calling it a 'vaccine': "so-called vaccine" "experimental gene therapy" "RNA injection" "jab" and even scare quote around "vaccine".

It's an expressly intentional piece of memetic warfare. Confuse people as to what a vaccine does, and then claim that we're being lied to about the vaccine.

 

[bernie14]

Nice to have a straight-up quote that in the theoretical universe where you had a child, you would "play the odds" with their life. Super nice.

If you would rather give a theoretical child a potentially life-threatening virus (with complications we don't fully yet understand the ramifications of) rather than give them a vaccine, yes, you are using anti-xavver talking points. You may not consider yourself one, but that's a pretty irrelevant distinction.

I don't suppose you'd say the same for measles, mumps, rubella, tuberculosis, etc, et al? Generally speaking, this backlash against Covid vaccines based on misinformation tends to restrain itself because the Covid vaccines are "new", and "untested", and "nothing like them has ever been done before". Of which only "new" is accurate, but so are all vaccines once. Look up the history for the polio vaccine - you might learn something!


All vaccines theoretically can have side-effects. Various Covid-19 vaccines appears to be little different in that regard. There is nothing about this "case specifically" that suggests anything different. Time may tell something different (but given the scale of vaccination efforts, increasingly unlikely), but time also may not. If you're going to make a claim and not evidence in the slightest, that's on you.

No wonder people comment on you spreading anti-vaxxer garbage.

I have 5 grown kids and two (step) grandkids. Along with my wife and I, our eldest (who has had RA since she was 13 and takes methotrexate) were vaccinated in February (with prescriptions I wrote), two others were vaccinated when the vaccine became available publicly, one had covid in April and the other is unvaccinated (since Delta, I have urged her to get vaccinated. if she does or doesn't, it's on her) . My oldest got the booster 3 weeks ago. as for the grandkids, it's the parents decision, not mine, certainly not the government's.

yes, polio history

You don't have your 5 and 10 year follow-ups for kids who get covid so I have to conclude that Drakle is right and this is just anti-vax bullfeathers. There is zero reason to suppose that the longer-term risks of contracting covid are preferable to the longer-term risk of being vaccinated, and plenty of reason to suppose the opposite.

you have absolutely no idea how the immune system works do you? the current vaccines work by telling your body to produce a "foreign" protein to which then, an antibody response is mounted. that protein can trigger an autoimmune response. Do you know that a "natural" immune response can produce multiple antibodies? Sure, more possibilities of autoimmune responses BUT if or when the covid virus mutates the specific spike protein that the vaccines are designed for, poof, the vaccine is useless. Those with natural immunity will still have protection.

 

[El_Machinae]

There seems to be a few assumptions there:
- the virus will mutate around the antibody so much that it will render the vaccination status useless (your premise requires that the vaccine doesn't help)

- the virus will mutate around the antibody so much that the virus itself will be more dangerous to a vaccinated person than an unvaccinated person (since the vaccine does nothing, you'd rather be unvaccinated when you meet it) AND

- that fighting off Delta 'naturally' is safer than fighting off the mutant 'naturally'

There's no guarantee that the virus that evolves around the vaccine is more dangerous. The entirety of that reasoning seems to rest on the idea that getting the vaccine makes you actually weaker for the next strain. That doesn't follow. If it's true, it just needs evidence.

But, even then, it would still require that the vaccine does nothing. We're all going to be fighting off Delta anyway, developing 'natural immunity' (on a spectrum of efficacy, obviously). Some of us are going to do it while vaccinated.

 

[Arwon]

What is it with this "jab" thing? I always knew these as "vaccine shots" not jabs. When did this terminology change and why?

I don't really care tbh, but as long as we're asking questions

We've been calling vaccinations jabs for years, for example here's a state government saying "get the flu jab" in 2014.

 

[bernie14]

There seems to be a few assumptions there:
- the virus will mutate around the antibody so much that it will render the vaccination status useless (your premise requires that the vaccine doesn't help)

- the virus will mutate around the antibody so much that the virus itself will be more dangerous to a vaccinated person than an unvaccinated person (since the vaccine does nothing, you'd rather be unvaccinated when you meet it) AND

- that fighting off Delta 'naturally' is safer than fighting off the mutant 'naturally'

There's no guarantee that the virus that evolves around the vaccine is more dangerous. The entirety of that reasoning seems to rest on the idea that getting the vaccine makes you actually weaker for the next strain. That doesn't follow. If it's true, it just needs evidence.

But, even then, it would still require that the vaccine does nothing. We're all going to be fighting off Delta anyway, developing 'natural immunity' (on a spectrum of efficacy, obviously). Some of us are going to do it while vaccinated.

no, it only requires time + unvaccinated

 

[El_Machinae]

no, it only requires time + unvaccinated

What does?

Cards on the table: you seem to be channeling Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche. His premise is faulty based on my observations above.

 

[Lexicus]

you have absolutely no idea how the immune system works do you? the current vaccines work by telling your body to produce a "foreign" protein to which then, an antibody response is mounted. that protein can trigger an autoimmune response. Do you know that a "natural" immune response can produce multiple antibodies? Sure, more possibilities of autoimmune responses BUT if or when the covid virus mutates the specific spike protein that the vaccines are designed for, poof, the vaccine is useless. Those with natural immunity will still have protection.

But what I actually said is that the medium and long-term effects of covid infection are in fact as unknown to us as the medium and long-term side effects of vaccination. So your "playing the odds" just seems like a pretty dumb move to me, my gut feeling is you are vastly overestimating the danger posed by the vaccine, underestimating the danger posed by the virus, or some combination of the two. We know that covid can inflict long-term organ damage already so I just don't agree with your analysis of the relative risk.

 

[Arwon]

Based on forward bookings we're going to get to 95% of 12+ population being vaccinated here in my territory.

 

[FriendlyFire]

We do have known side effects to COVID vaccines though, and while their risk is minimal it's not nothing, and it seems strange to push them on people who've had the disease already.
The opportunity cost argument is especially strong (giving vaccines to people with almost no measurable benefit is nonsense/straight up unethical when the alternative is giving them to unvaccinated people who want them).

Probably because more study is needed to see how strong natural immunity is against those with vaccines. Thus the idea of booster shots for everyone that wants it to increase covid protection
This might not make sense, but the US is currently in crisis and sitting on a lot of vaccine. With the hospitols filling and lots of dying, this maybe a way to stopping more people getting sick and requiring hospital care.
Since a segment of the population dosnt want vaccines, and would rather take horse de-wormers.

Why take booster doses?
There are generally two reasons why people might consider vaccine boosters. The first is that immunity naturally wanes over time. Without repeated exposure to certain antigens, the immune system may become less able to prevent infection or disease. Vaccine boosters help the immune system maintain a protective response.

“Another reason we may need booster vaccinations is viral variants,” a spokesperson from the COVID-19 Vaccine Team at the University of Oxford told Medical News Today. They went on to explain:
“Alternatively, we can use a booster vaccine that specifically targets the viral variant. This works by producing a new immune response to the parts of the virus which have changed from the original vaccine whilst also improving the existing immune response against the unchanged parts of the virus, which also should help protect against other variants,” they added.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/are-covid-19-vaccine-boosters-the-way-forward

 

[stfoskey12]

What do you all think of monoclonal antibody treatment for Covid-19?

 

[Absolution]

Just took my 3rd shot.
I'm not yet 26, and had my previous two in March.

I don't really know what's the purpose of giving me the 3rd. Seems hysteric.
But otherwise my green pass would have expired at the 1st of October, so I took it.
Because whatever...

 

[Gorbles]

I have 5 grown kids and two (step) grandkids. Along with my wife and I, our eldest (who has had RA since she was 13 and takes methotrexate) were vaccinated in February (with prescriptions I wrote), two others were vaccinated when the vaccine became available publicly, one had covid in April and the other is unvaccinated (since Delta, I have urged her to get vaccinated. if she does or doesn't, it's on her) . My oldest got the booster 3 weeks ago. as for the grandkids, it's the parents decision, not mine, certainly not the government's.

You have five grown kids. The one that's 5 - 10 years old you said you'd "play the odds with" is still fictitious.

 

[Samson]

What do you all think of monoclonal antibody treatment for Covid-19?

They are the new hot ticket form of medicine for lots of things, are well understood and I would expect them to work well.

However they are eye wateringly expensive, to the extent that they are not a global solution to covid mortality. I came here to post about how the liberal paradise of Tennessee is only giving them to patriotic anti vaxers:

Extraordinary demand coupled with the federal government’s need to cap shipments of these scarce drugs has forced Tennessee health officials to recommend limiting the treatment to unvaccinated patients with the worst cases of Covid-19. Under the Tennessee recommendations, vaccinated people who are immunocompromised will also be eligible for the treatment.

“For example, if a patient who had a heart transplant had received the vaccine but is still at risk of severe Covid-19 infection was denied access to antibody treatment that could have reduced the severity of their infection, how is this fair?” asked Dr. Sadiya Khan

“Clinically, it makes sense, but the doctor in me thinks about all these ‘what ifs?’ What if there is a super-high-risk older person, but they are not technically considered immunocompromised? Do they not get it but a 22-year-old unvaccinated person with asthma – they get it?” said Dr. Lisa Piercey, Tennessee’s top health official​

 

[amadeus]

@Samson wow x 3

Antepenultimate wow: on one end it makes sense from the medical point of who’s at risk.

Penultimate wow: so people who reject vaccines will accept new medical treatments that are more expensive and not preventative? This is why I don’t have a problem with compulsory vaccination: in a democratic society, stupid people have equal say. They shouldn’t.

Unrelated but final wow: five ads at the bottom of the page and every one of them was for that Cliff’s Notes-on-tape app from Germany. There’s a negative return on the number of dumb ads I see, and the more I see yours, the less inclined I am to click. I can read books myself, whole ones! With my eyes!

 

[The_J]

It's actually remarkably easy for a vaccine to produce long-term autoimmune conditions, if someone wasn't careful (or lucky) enough to avoid it.

I've never heard of that. You have a link?
I'd expect that this manifests way faster, and wouldn't be exactly long-term either.

What do you all think of monoclonal antibody treatment for Covid-19?

As @Samson says: Useful, but too expensive (and complicated) on large scale.