I feel so frustrated about people refusing vaccination…

[MercyA]

@BronzeTurtle, have you posted here before with another username, or are you new? Just curious! 

Even though I don't agree with you for the most part, you've got fortitude, I'll give you that! (As does Bootsie.) 😉 

[prairiewindmomma]

7 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

It tickles me that this thread is titled about being frustrated with people not vaccinating and then when I say my vaccine works, there is someone to debate me. Time is a flat circle, haha.

This is rude.

11 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

oh, so we're not talking about avoiding severe disease, hospitalization, death? we're talking about avoiding infection entirely? like if it gets in your nose, it doesn't infect you to the point of being detectable? yeah, i'm not worried about that.  my vaccine works to keep me from getting seriously ill, much like a flu shot. 47% is about on par for that. I mean, great if I don't get infected, but I've always assumed I'm going to. covid is going to be around forever now and I don't think i can possibly avoid infection or make sure everyone around me is getting shots every six months or whatever.

 

I find it interesting that every time you make a point, and I link studies evidence to show that maybe your assertion isn't based on available scientific data, that you change the argument and raise another point.

I'm glad that you aren't worried about being infected because you have the privilege of good health. As I mentioned above, I'm worried about being infected because my risk factors put me at a higher risk of complications. As I mentioned above, I'm worried about long term milder effects because those are statistically more likely for me than death---but the milder effects of being oxygen dependent or having heart issues are impactful.

I've repeatedly raised the point about needing to do timely boosters.

So, yeah, maybe flat circle, but not in the way you intended.

[Spy Car]

4 hours ago, BronzeTurtle said:

Except antibodies wane in everyone right? it's immune memory cells that are important, not antibodies. That's why we get two shots...to activtate the memory of the immune system from the first shot. I don't even think we have an easy blood test for things like t-cells and b-cells that fight off infections. I am fully vaccinated and probably wouldn't pass an antibody test, and yet my risk of placing any kind of burden on the medical system is very low according to how my vaccine works. plus with two shots i'm considered vaccinated for any and all mandates i know of even if i no longer have antibodies. i actually can't figure out why there is such focus on antibodies as those seem to be short lived and not durably protective according to the stuff i've read.

No. That's why there are booster shots to help prevent infections by raising antibody levels. Pretty important given the current emergency situation.

Delta changed things. Those with two shots are highly protected from hospitalization and death (these vaccines are medical miracles in that regard) but Delta can cause contagious breakthrough illness if antibodies are low and people are reliant on memory immunity alone.

Bill

 

Edited October 15, 2021 by Spy Car

[SeaConquest]

4 hours ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I've often wondered why we haven't seen more footage of what being inside of an ICU covid unit looks like.  I realize there are privacy concerns, but I suspect if people watched more procedures of what it looked like---what the actual care is---and how many of those patients are unvaccinated compared to those who have been vaccinated, if sentiment would change.I think if people saw what the pressure sores, the bipap or ECMO, the feeding tubes, the neuro deficits, the stillborn babies from the placenta clotting off.....like if they actually SAW what that looks like if it could cut through the disinformation a bit.

I try to show people videos of what it's like inside of a Covid ICU as much as possible because, you are right, the public really needs to see more of it. Much much more. Working in the ICU during this pandemic has put the fear of G-d in me re Covid (and I haven't been working in a "Covid ICU").

IMO, it is criminal what is happening to our healthcare system because of the anti-vaxxers in our country. I cannot adequately express my anger. Those of you who don't understand the reason for these mandates really need to hear the words of the people being affected.

This is how your family gets to say goodbye to you. You get to die of suffocation with an ICU nurse and a respiratory therapist by your side.
 

Enjoy your "freedom":

And let's not forget that it's not just mortality that matters. Covid causes tremendous disability:

This was at the beginning of the pandemic. You can watch how these travel nurses were affected:

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/in-depth-features/covid-chasers-the-nurses-fighting-coronavirus-from-hot-spot-to-hot-spot/E05FF3C1-0873-4AF9-ADA1-9F1CECE24065
 

[SeaConquest]

1 hour ago, prairiewindmomma said:

Just because you have had covid once doesn't mean you won't get covid again.

There are a number of individuals who have had repeat infections, including teachers and healthcare workers that I know.

I don't want an unvaccinated person working as my nurse because: 1. there is direct close contact, 2. they are statistically more likely than a vaccinated person to contract covid, 3. they are statistically more likely to carry a higher viral load than a vaccinated person if they were to contract covid, and 4. they most likely work with vulnerable populations (like me!) for whom the consequences of catching disease are higher, 5. the person receiving medical care often has to unmask as part of that care so I have no ability to fully protect myself (this year I've had to unmask for dental care, breathing treatments, and a few other things). 

I would probably feel differently if repeat infections weren't a thing, but they are.  If it was like smallpox, and once you had it you were immune, I'd be ok with that. But covid isn't like that.

THANK YOU! Why do people continue to think that they are immune to Covid forever? How many times do I have to repeat the story of the ICU nurses that I worked with in Texas that had Covid more than once because they believed the same bogus information and refused vaccination on that basis? 

I hope every nurse that refuses to be vaccinated and boosted regularly (unless he or she has a legit medical exemption) gets kicked to the curb because those nurses clearly don't understand science and have no business being representatives of a profession that is grounded in evidence-based practice. Good riddance.  

Edited October 14, 2021 by SeaConquest

[BronzeTurtle]

Quote

That's obviously their and your prerogative. The elderly in my life want to live long past this, so want and appreciate the caution.

 

@KSera do you think there is going to be a point where covid is gone? do your parents think that? that may explain a lot of this conversation, actually. I don't think it's ever going to be gone. I think covid is going to be a common respiratory ailment that elderly and others can get vaccinated for and will minimize effects, but I don't think there will ever be a getting past it. And I think it will be a cause of death like the flu or other respiratory diseases. 

i'm not saying that i want old people to die of covid, but for the elderly in my life barely handled being isolated for 2020. post-vaccine they wanted to be around their kids, grandkids, nieces, nephews, grand nieces and nephews. they talk about 2020 as if they were being preserved for the sake of it but not being able to be close and visit with people was not the life they wanted to lead even if being hugged and visited for holidays meant a shorter time on earth. as in, they do not fear of dying of this one specific thing more than other respiratory things or falls or anything else. they see themselves as having a few years left being in upper 80s and don't want to spend any percentage of it without family near, without celebrating things traditionally.

 

anyway, just to say that if people think there is going to be a period in the future that will be covid free and that they are still young enough to get there, that may color perspective some. or if you feel like you don't want to die of covid specifically so you want to get to a point where that is a risk like the flu or other UR bugs? I don't know.

[BronzeTurtle]

4 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

THANK YOU! Why do people continue to think that they are immune to Covid forever? How many times do I have to repeat the story of the ICU nurses that I worked with in Texas that had Covid more than once because they believed the same bogus information and refused vaccination on that basis? 

I hope every nurse that refuses to be vaccinated and boosted regularly (unless he or she has a legit medical exemption) gets kicked to the curb because those nurses clearly don't understand science and have no business being representatives of a profession that is grounded in evidence-based practice. Good riddance.  

this is super scary to me. this attitude towards fellow humans who had to work through without a vaccine is honestly scarier to me. there's no way to remove the unconscious bias this kind of sentiment carries when caring for people with this type of thing in your mind about them.

 

kicking people to the curb and wishing them good riddance...why would you even enter health care with hospitals full of people who did stupid stuff or didn't take care of themselves? this blows my mind absolutely.

 

this thread is depressing. like changing my view of nurses and humanity. this isn't some crazy comments section on facebook. but this reads like it, unhinged is the word of the day.

[BronzeTurtle]

35 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

This is rude.

I find it interesting that every time you make a point, and I link studies evidence to show that maybe your assertion isn't based on available scientific data, that you change the argument and raise another point.

I'm glad that you aren't worried about being infected because you have the privilege of good health. As I mentioned above, I'm worried about being infected because my risk factors put me at a higher risk of complications. As I mentioned above, I'm worried about long term milder effects because those are statistically more likely for me than death---but the milder effects of being oxygen dependent or having heart issues are impactful.

I've repeatedly raised the point about needing to do timely boosters.

So, yeah, maybe flat circle, but not in the way you intended.

This post makes a tonne of assumptions about my tone, my meaning, my personal health. I gave a long post about why the vaccine works to give your citations the seriousness they deserved. I think the vaccine does work. If I didn't think so I would not have gotten it. I also made a lighthearted comment meant to lighten the mood...because it is funny to be in a thread about being frustrated that people won't vaccinate and then telling a vaccinated person that their vax doesn't work. If you don't think that's funny, or at least mildly amusing, then you're taking the internet too seriously.

What is deadly serious is a literal nurse caring for humans who thinks those who don't get vaccinated should be kicked to the curb.

[SeaConquest]

3 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

this is super scary to me. this attitude towards fellow humans who had to work through without a vaccine is honestly scarier to me. there's no way to remove the unconscious bias this kind of sentiment carries when caring for people with this type of thing in your mind about them.

 

kicking people to the curb and wishing them good riddance...why would you even enter health care with hospitals full of people who did stupid stuff or didn't take care of themselves? this blows my mind absolutely.

 

this thread is depressing. like changing my view of nurses and humanity. this isn't some crazy comments section on facebook. but this reads like it, unhinged is the word of the day.

People do stupid stuff all of the time. I do stupid stuff all of the time. I don't intentionally do stupid stuff that puts other people in harm's way at my job. And if I did, I would expect to be fired. Why is this even controversial?

We are not talking about people pigging out on too much pizza or drinking too much in their free time. We are talking about someone going into a hospital with a loaded weapon and intentionally shooting up the place. I don't care if you worked honorably for 20 years before that; you don't get to intentionally cause damage to people. When you know better, you do better. There was no vaccine at the beginning of the pandemic. Vaccines came out under emergency authorization. Some of us lined up to get them. Others hesitated. The vaccines were studied. Billions of doses were administered globally. They were deemed to be both safe and effective by physicians and scientists the world over. Now, those healthcare workers who hesitated are being told that the time for equivocation is over. It is time to be vaccinated to protect public health DURING A PANDEMIC. We are asked to be vaccinated for a myriad of other diseases and we do it. That's part of our job. You go into this profession knowing that that's part of our job. You don't get to opt out of vaccines and go to clinicals. It's part of the deal and everyone knows it. But, suddenly now, in the midst of a 100-year pandemic, after these vaccines have been vetted the world over, we have to put up with these refuseniks compromising patient care? GTFO here with that nonsense.

My humanity is well intact. I changed my entire profession because I wanted to help my fellow humans -- whether they are mentally ill or proned and sedated. I could have gone back to making a crap ton of money as an attorney, but here I am, at almost 47 years old and a new grad nurse, suited up and ready to join the fight in the ICU. So, don't lecture me about my humanity or my compassion for my fellow humans from your keyboard. 

[happi duck]

6 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

This post makes a tonne of assumptions about my tone, my meaning, my personal health. I gave a long post about why the vaccine works to give your citations the seriousness they deserved. I think the vaccine does work. If I didn't think so I would not have gotten it. I also made a lighthearted comment meant to lighten the mood...because it is funny to be in a thread about being frustrated that people won't vaccinate and then telling a vaccinated person that their vax doesn't work. If you don't think that's funny, or at least mildly amusing, then you're taking the internet too seriously.

What is deadly serious is a literal nurse caring for humans who thinks those who don't get vaccinated should be kicked to the curb.

I don't often get angry enough to post in anger but... c'mon.

Yes, of course we all know the vaccine works.  That's why we want people to vaccinate and stop filling up hospitals and stop playing host to new variants.

And stop twisting everything.  Someone thinking that their coworkers who are willfully putting people at risk deserve to be fired is not someone kicking their patients to the curb.

[SeaConquest]

3 minutes ago, happi duck said:

And stop twisting everything.  Someone thinking that their coworkers who are willfully putting people at risk deserve to be fired is not someone kicking their patients to the curb.

But, we are the unhinged ones. 

[KSera]

46 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

 

@KSera do you think there is going to be a point where covid is gone? do your parents think that? that may explain a lot of this conversation, actually. I don't think it's ever going to be gone. I think covid is going to be a common respiratory ailment that elderly and others can get vaccinated for and will minimize effects, but I don't think there will ever be a getting past it. And I think it will be a cause of death like the flu or other respiratory diseases. 

i'm not saying that i want old people to die of covid, but for the elderly in my life barely handled being isolated for 2020. post-vaccine they wanted to be around their kids, grandkids, nieces, nephews, grand nieces and nephews. they talk about 2020 as if they were being preserved for the sake of it but not being able to be close and visit with people was not the life they wanted to lead even if being hugged and visited for holidays meant a shorter time on earth. as in, they do not fear of dying of this one specific thing more than other respiratory things or falls or anything else. they see themselves as having a few years left being in upper 80s and don't want to spend any percentage of it without family near, without celebrating things traditionally.

 

I do not think Covid will be gone. But I sure as heck hope for a time where we aren't routinely losing a couple thousand Americans a day to it (I don't know what the worldwide daily number is, but I don't want that for the world, either). At this point, it is expected to be endemic, but that doesn't mean uncontrolled, and certainly not just accepting the current level of death and disease. That's really unsustainable for us to just have this at this level for always, and it doesn't need to be that way. My parents hope for a time when they can do normal things without it meaning an unacceptably high risk that they will be infected with Covid any time they go out. If most everyone gets vaccinated, that will be the case.

As I have said a couple times now, it's fine for people to have different risk tolerance levels for themselves. My parents may be elderly, but they are healthy enough that they drive, travel worldwide (when not in a pandemic) and are fully independent. They have no reason not to expect that they will have a number of years left like that given average lifespans of their families, and for them it's been worth taking extra precautions and limiting exposure in order to keep living. I (and they) would be pissed off beyond description if they were exposed and infected by an unvaccinated HCW when they went in for a routine health appointment. I know it could happen from a vaccinated HCW, and they wear excellent masks for that reason, but to multiply the risk many times over when that is mitigable is not acceptable. I understand your elderly family members have chosen differently, but you can't dictate that other people should accept a higher risk to their lives just because you do.

On that word "endemic", this epidemiologist recently gave a good explanation of what that might look like with Covid:

 

[BronzeTurtle]

19 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

People do stupid stuff all of the time. I do stupid stuff all of the time. I don't intentionally do stupid stuff that puts other people in harm's way at my job. And if I did, I would expect to be fired. Why is this even controversial?

We are not talking about people pigging out on too much pizza or drinking too much in their free time. We are talking about someone going into a hospital with a loaded weapon and intentionally shooting up the place. I don't care if you worked honorably for 20 years before that; you don't get to intentionally cause damage to people. When you know better, you do better. There was no vaccine at the beginning of the pandemic. Vaccines came out under emergency authorization. Some of us lined up to get them. Others hesitated. The vaccines were studied. Billions of doses were administered globally. They were deemed to be both safe and effective by physicians and scientists the world over. Now, those healthcare workers who hesitated are being told that the time for equivocation is over. It is time to be vaccinated to protect public health DURING A PANDEMIC. We are asked to be vaccinated for a myriad of other diseases and we do it. That's part of our job. You go into this profession knowing that that's part of our job. You don't get to opt out of vaccines and go to clinicals. It's part of the deal and everyone knows it. But, suddenly now, in the midst of a 100-year pandemic, after these vaccines have been vetted the world over, we have to put up with these refuseniks compromising patient care? GTFO here with that nonsense.

My humanity is well intact. I changed my entire profession because I wanted to help my fellow humans -- whether they are mentally ill or proned and sedated. I could have gone back to making a crap ton of money as an attorney, but here I am, at almost 47 years old and a new grad nurse, suited up and ready to join the fight in the ICU. So, don't lecture me about my humanity or my compassion for my fellow humans from your keyboard. 

 unconscious bias is a real thing. i wouldn't want someone talking about kicking others to the curb or good riddance to people. it would scare me if i was in a vulnerable position to them or putting someone vulnerable into their care. i'm not lecturing you. i'm sharing my feelings on your post which scared me quite a bit. i am more scared of someone working angry than a healthy person not having had this one specific shot that i have already had myself. i have had an angry nurse before and it was, not to exaggerate, scary for me, more scary than the procedure i was having really. or at least it made the procedure that much scarier in some ways. in the case of hypothetically overhearing what you posted as a patient, how would i know she doesn't want to kick me to the curb but can't? or that she doesn't think good riddance about what i'm in the hospital for? knowing your nurse thinks good riddance about some portion of humanity is scary for someone about to be unconscious around that person, lol. i would rather them being making a crap ton of money in some other non patient care job, to be honest.

but then i also don't think healthy people are loaded weapons out to intentionally damage people, especially if they put their lives on the line before they could even be sure a vaccine was going to be possible. so we differ on a lot.

[frogger]

2 hours ago, KSera said:

 

Really? That's so interesting. Here, mandates have worked incredibly well. Mask mandates have come and gone a couple times, depending on case numbers and variants, and each time, you saw the masks coming off when not required, and then right back on when required again. Mid-Summer, less than half the people in stores were wearing masks. By September when mandates were in place again. I never saw anyone without a mask inside, and still don't.

I'm still for the mandate for masking in public areas as it raised the overall percentage of people masking. Maybe 70-80% instead of 30% which could make a big difference in overall numbers. Any little bit helps and masking is certainly different than vaccination but sadly less helpful. Especially when those who don't care wear it under there nose or purposely make it out of porous material to prove their point. Arghh 

I do think low income employees were put in very bad positions trying to enforce it though. ☹️

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bootsie]

43 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

People do stupid stuff all of the time. I do stupid stuff all of the time. I don't intentionally do stupid stuff that puts other people in harm's way at my job. And if I did, I would expect to be fired. Why is this even controversial?

We are not talking about people pigging out on too much pizza or drinking too much in their free time. We are talking about someone going into a hospital with a loaded weapon and intentionally shooting up the place. I don't care if you worked honorably for 20 years before that; you don't get to intentionally cause damage to people.  

I am vaccinated.  I would never refer to a coworker, a student, or otther person who, (especially for reasons I am not privy to) has not been vaccinated.  If someone KNEW they were sick and said that were going to go spit on, cough on, sneeze on, and do other things to inentionally infect other people, maybe this type of language would be appropriate.  I don't think I would even use this type of language for someone who had some reason to believe that there was some possiblity that they MIGHT be ill.  

If I have a healthy student who comes to my class who is not vaccinated, they are not a loaded gun and they are not intentionally harming others.  They coud have made choices that would reduce my risk, but that is a different conversation.  If I had the choice of being in a room with someone who was not vaccinated, but was healthy and otherwise taking few risks and someone who was vaccinated but going to crowded bars, drinking after others, in people's faces singing karaoke, I think I might feel safer with the first person.  

I am fearful that this type of rhetoric and portrayal of human beings fuels their resistance to being vaccinated, whether it is rational or irrational on their part.  I do not see that it helps in any way.  

 

[frogger]

2 hours ago, kiwik said:

The only thing than can be done is to guilt people into behaving in a responsible way.  In times past that was done by shaming and shunning the person and by extension their family.  Either the family sorted it out or the person was ejected.  We haven't quite worked out a modern day equivalent. Maybe stocks in all public parks?

No, it still works. I'm afraid in many areas of the country, the shaming and shunning works the other way around though.

I am proud of my kids since they seem to be able to handle it. Their own Grandparents snarked and complained over the summer when numbers were low. Surprisingly the other teens don't bother them as much but I guess you choose your friends and not your relatives. Now that there is a surge we don't see them though I will Zoom with my mom. My mom isn't so bad by step parents and in laws are frustrating. 

No, this shaming stuff still exists. Which is why places that have a majority masked have an easier time converting the others than those places where the majority don't mask before mandates.

Vaccinations are less obvious so it is harder to tell. 

Edited October 14, 2021 by frogger

[TravelingChris]

3 hours ago, BronzeTurtle said:

The people who have been my heroes in all of this are the people willing to enter in with the sick or put themselves in harms way of this illness despite great personal risk. Teachers who were willing to teach when public schools shut down. Daycare workers for people who couldn't work from home. People who couldn't work from home. Nurses and doctors. People working in prisons and meat packing plants. 

It was and is amazing to me. It actually breaks my heart that a lot of those people now are being lumped in with anti-vax crazies because they went through all of that exposure and now don't want a vaccine for various reasons. i just think, dang, if a nurse worked through covid, probably got covid, and now doesn't want a vaccine...i'll let her be my nurse. that person is my personal hero. instead there are a whole bunch of people who think she should be fired and not leave her house or do anything non-essential. and it isn't even about science if she's already had covid and seen the worst of the worst.  the whole thing definitely baffles me.

I am not for firing people with high immunity.  I think excluding those people from work or anything else is just wrong.

But if that nurse got sick with Covid in April 2020, she most likely does not have strong antibodies.  And I don't think anti-vaccers should be in health care-   the biggest users of healthcare are people like me, people who have multiple chronic illnesses or people like cancer patients or organ failure people and others who also use lots of healthcare.  Health workers should not be trying to kill us.  Also,  I want health care workers who aren't anti-science. Because I don't trust such a person to make good decisions regarding my health or others.

[BronzeTurtle]

3 minutes ago, KSera said:

I do not think Covid will be gone. But I sure as heck hope for a time where we aren't routinely losing a couple thousand Americans a day to it (I don't know what the worldwide daily number is, but I don't want that for the world, either). At this point, it is expected to be endemic, but that doesn't mean uncontrolled, and certainly not just accepting the current level of death and disease. That's really unsustainable for us to just have this at this level for always, and it doesn't need to be that way. My parents hope for a time when they can do normal things without it meaning an unacceptably high risk that they will be infected with Covid any time they go out. If most everyone gets vaccinated, that will be the case.

As I have said a couple times now, it's fine for people to have different risk tolerance levels for themselves. My parents may be elderly, but they are healthy enough that they drive, travel worldwide (when not in a pandemic) and are fully independent. They have no reason not to expect that they will have a number of years left like that given average lifespans of their families, and for them it's been worth taking extra precautions and limiting exposure in order to keep living. I (and they) would be pissed off beyond description if they were exposed and infected by an unvaccinated HCW when they went in for a routine health appointment. I know it could happen from a vaccinated HCW, and they wear excellent masks for that reason, but to multiply the risk many times over when that is mitigable is not acceptable. I understand your elderly family members have chosen differently, but you can't dictate that other people should accept a higher risk to their lives just because you do.

On that word "endemic", this epidemiologist recently gave a good explanation of what that might look like with Covid:

 

I read this a couple weeks ago. She thinks covid didn't have to become endemic but that it is endemic because our leaders made bad choices. if i recall correctly from the thread she thinks we could still eradicate it if we really buckle down.  i know she is credentialed, but that is a big flag to me that i can't take that seriously or any real policy prescriptions. we would, for example, have to cull millions of animals if we even could possibly get rid of all the animal reservoirs. zerocovid, or that we could have had zerocovid at any point after the west learned about sars2, is not a serious position. her explanation of endemic is helpful as far as it goes but what that means for life going forward depends a lot on individual choices.

And oh my goodness, no I don't think people should accept the same level of risk that I do or that I would even dream of requiring that! my whole point this whole thread is that people should be able to accept a level of risk that is acceptable to them! if they want to isolate to stay away from this, then great. if they don't, then don't. if they want to get a booster every 6 months then do. if they can't handle the side effects, then don't. if they think their kids shouldn't have to risk myocarditis because the risk of severe disease is small, they should make that choice. I am aboslutely not asking anyone to accept my acceptable level of risk. I'm sorry i gave that impression! I can't control anyone else's level of acceptable risk.

i still don't entirely understand a vaccinated boostered person being worried about being around an unvaccinated person, but i accept that is something people don't want to do. like i said, i got the vaccine so i didn't have to worry about unvaccinated folks. I don't know how they are going to get everyone to keep up with boosters every six months without authoritarian, draconian measures, but i accept that is something someone would not want to do in their life. 

I think the idea that we can control this bug as a society requires a lot of authoritarian choices and in the US that means giving authority to people that we don't trust very much at all. Or that somehow at some point it's just too many people dying? yes death is bad, but to me that's like saying just too many people have died from this natural event. mother nature does not care or have a limit on people dying. like a meteor strikes the earth, or an even deadlier disease, and we shake our finger at a virus and our fellow man and say, "now I've had enough death. this is just not sustainable" it doesn't make sense to me as a stance. do I want my loved ones to die? no. i hate it, in fact. but that doesn't change the fact they all will. I can say, "this is too much death from COPD." or "this is too much death from dying peacefully in your sleep." and it doesn't change a gosh darn thing. I can only do the best I have to live the best I know how in the meantime right? and for my elderly relatives that means not being isolated from family even if it means dying of this particular thing. maybe it's fatalistic, i don't know.
 

but I don't think endemic means harmless, which i think was her contention that people said endemic to mean harmless. i do think that it is worthwhile to try to minimize human suffering as far as possible, but there are tradeoffs to that too for the elderly and even the vulnerable to covid. i just don't think we are going to "get past it" in any real sense. 

[prairiewindmomma]

I think there is a difference between individuals who work in some areas, but not in others.

If you are in the Army, you know going into it that you are going to have all kinds of vaccines, including some that are unpleasant and with potential side effects (like Yellow Fever) because that is part of the readiness mandate.

Likewise, going into healthcare, one makes similar choices.

Teachers get tested for tuberculosis, as do others such as correctional officers and those who work in high exposure places. We don't seem to have issue with that, as a society.

Why we are drawing arbitrary distinctions between one disease prevention and another is just.....interesting.  We are talking about how our choices impact others in public spaces---I, personally, am not arguing that a stay at home/telecommuter should be mandated for vaccination as a society. Whether a corporation chooses to require that as a basis for employment is up to them.

[prairiewindmomma]

On 10/13/2021 at 4:29 PM, TechWife said:

By definition, workplaces are communities and as such are part of the public health realm. Because it regulates workplace health and safety, quite a few public health measures are enforced by OSHA. other regulatory agencies develop and enforce public health policy as well - the FDA, CMS and USDA are three that immediately come to  my mind. Many of their regulations are enforced by private employers. 

You may not be aware of the scope of what is considered public health. Here’s a good starting place definition- 
 

Public health is the science of protecting and improving the health of people and their communities. This work is achieved by promoting healthy lifestyles, researching disease and injury prevention, and detecting, preventing and responding to infectious diseases. Overall, public health is concerned with protecting the health of entire populations. These populations can be as small as a local neighborhood, or as big as an entire country or region of the world.

https://www.cdcfoundation.org/what-public-health
 

 

We've kind of looped back to where we were on page 8.  TechWife's post is most excellent.

[BronzeTurtle]

58 minutes ago, happi duck said:

I don't often get angry enough to post in anger but... c'mon.

Yes, of course we all know the vaccine works.  That's why we want people to vaccinate and stop filling up hospitals and stop playing host to new variants.

And stop twisting everything.  Someone thinking that their coworkers who are willfully putting people at risk deserve to be fired is not someone kicking their patients to the curb.

I have quoted and responded to people's own words directly including the two posts you mentioned. Please stop twisting my words.

[TravelingChris]

So I am high risk and have had 3 vaccines. I am like Prairiewindmom. - I don't care to inquire who has been vacced or not.  

[SeaConquest]

1 hour ago, BronzeTurtle said:

 unconscious bias is a real thing. i wouldn't want someone talking about kicking others to the curb or good riddance to people. it would scare me if i was in a vulnerable position to them or putting someone vulnerable into their care. i'm not lecturing you. i'm sharing my feelings on your post which scared me quite a bit. i am more scared of someone working angry than a healthy person not having had this one specific shot that i have already had myself. i have had an angry nurse before and it was, not to exaggerate, scary for me, more scary than the procedure i was having really. or at least it made the procedure that much scarier in some ways. in the case of hypothetically overhearing what you posted as a patient, how would i know she doesn't want to kick me to the curb but can't? or that she doesn't think good riddance about what i'm in the hospital for? knowing your nurse thinks good riddance about some portion of humanity is scary for someone about to be unconscious around that person, lol. i would rather them being making a crap ton of money in some other non patient care job, to be honest.

but then i also don't think healthy people are loaded weapons out to intentionally damage people, especially if they put their lives on the line before they could even be sure a vaccine was going to be possible. so we differ on a lot.

Yes, we do. It's clear that you don't find people to be scary who are intentionally willing to jeopardize their patients' safety by refusing to follow the established standard of care, which is to vaccinate. But, when I say "good riddance" that they are now being asked (20 months into the pandemic) to find some a new line of work, where they can be free to exercise their autonomous, personal choices re vaccination, this is somehow a frightening prospect. I am giving them exactly what they asked for: informed consent, bodily autonomy, and personal responsibility and accountability for their choices.

Nurses are one of the top most trusted professions in the United States. To preserve that trust, we need people who can carry out the ethical duties of a nurse. Among those duties are safe patient care, owing the same duties to self as to others, preserving the safety, integrity, and competence of the profession, and improving health care environments that are consistent with the values of the profession. This is stuff that is straight of the American Nurses Assn Code of Ethics. If you cannot uphold these principles, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to argue how going against the standard of safe patient care and arguing against the overwhelming science in favor of vaccination is doing so, then I don't think it is a controversial statement to say that these people should be fired.    

And I do find it interesting, however, that you're certain that all of these unvaccinated nurses are only working in their units healthy, as if Covid actually worked that way. Like the unvaccinated ICU nurses that I worked with, who had Covid twice, I am sure that they didn't spread it to any of our already uber vulnerable patients in the ICU, right? And no one in my family has had Covid this entire time, despite my numerous work exposures, But, I am somehow the scary one in this scenario. Yes, we differ quite a bit in our values, to be sure.

 

Edited October 15, 2021 by SeaConquest

[KSera]

45 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

 Or that somehow at some point it's just too many people dying? yes death is bad, but to me that's like saying just too many people have died from this natural event. mother nature does not care or have a limit on people dying. like a meteor strikes the earth, or an even deadlier disease, and we shake our finger at a virus and our fellow man and say, "now I've had enough death. this is just not sustainable" it doesn't make sense to me as a stance. do I want my loved ones to die? no. i hate it, in fact. but that doesn't change the fact they all will. I can say, "this is too much death from COPD." or "this is too much death from dying peacefully in your sleep." and it doesn't change a gosh darn thing.

We clearly have different perspectives on this, then. Almost 5 million people on the planet have died of this disease since it started, and over 700,000 just in the US in the last 20 months. That is an incredible amount of death far above what is typical, and most of it is now preventable. Pandemics don't last forever, but right now we're in the middle of one. I'm not just going to shrug, and go "meh, pandemic's gonna pandemic" and go on with life without mitigations. Eventually it will end (meaning not that the disease goes away, but that we no longer have this enormous increase in loss of life and overwhelm of the hospital system. I assume you know that this is sever enough that the average life expectancy for an American has dropped over the past year? That's a big deal.) Unlike past pandemics, we actually have a way to prevent this level of death and disease from continuing. Like a miracle. That brings us back around to the point of this thread. I am frustrated because so many people are dying of this disease that has an amazing vaccine that can prevent the vast majority of these deaths (and hospitalizations, which is a big deal as well for our health care system AND for our poor HCW that have been dealing with it for so long). I am further frustrated because one of the primary reasons people are refusing the vaccines that would save their lives is because other people are pushing crap disinformation out constantly. People are legitimately confused and don't know what to believe, and it's the fault of people pushing these false narratives about the vaccines being some political thing and being dangerous. And then people both believe that and/or think they have to refuse the vaccine as some kind of sign of their political loyalty. If anyone isn't incredibly upset that so many people are dying because of that, I don't know what to say about that.

[SeaConquest]

1 hour ago, Bootsie said:

I am vaccinated.  I would never refer to a coworker, a student, or otther person who, (especially for reasons I am not privy to) has not been vaccinated.  If someone KNEW they were sick and said that were going to go spit on, cough on, sneeze on, and do other things to inentionally infect other people, maybe this type of language would be appropriate.  I don't think I would even use this type of language for someone who had some reason to believe that there was some possiblity that they MIGHT be ill.  

If I have a healthy student who comes to my class who is not vaccinated, they are not a loaded gun and they are not intentionally harming others.  They coud have made choices that would reduce my risk, but that is a different conversation.  If I had the choice of being in a room with someone who was not vaccinated, but was healthy and otherwise taking few risks and someone who was vaccinated but going to crowded bars, drinking after others, in people's faces singing karaoke, I think I might feel safer with the first person.  

I am fearful that this type of rhetoric and portrayal of human beings fuels their resistance to being vaccinated, whether it is rational or irrational on their part.  I do not see that it helps in any way.  

 

She is trying to draw a false equivalence between these anti-vax nurses, who go into a profession knowing that vaccines are part of the profession, and people who eat too much or drink too much in their free time. 

And now, you're making a false equivalence between your coworker, some rando student, and these anti-vax nurses. Again, these nurses have an *ethical duty* to provide safe patient care, to preserve the safety, integrity, and competence of the profession, and to improve their health care environments, consistent with the values of the profession. None of which are they doing at present.

One of the first things you learn in law school is the concept that there can be no breach of contract where there is no duty. Your coworker and the random student don't owe anyone a duty -- maybe a moral one, you could argue, but certainly no ethical duty that is part of their profession. However, attorneys, physicians, *and nurses* have certain ethical duties that are literally part of their ethical codes of conduct. You breach those duties and you can lose your license. Like, it is literally nursing school 101. This is why this is not even a close call for hospital attorneys. If you have unvaxed nurses on staff, when there is an FDA approved vaccine available, the hospital is going to be liable if they don't require their staff to be vaccinated against a potentially deadly disease. This is an ethical and legal duty, and there is plenty of legal precedent for it.

And as much as these anti-vaxxers want to protest the situation, they are going to lose. And, you can make whatever ad hominem attacks you want about me on this board, but I'm not crying about that loss. It's better for patients and it's better for the profession that these folks are culled.

That has nothing to do with patients. Patients don't owe me a duty. Patients do stupid things all the time. I didn't go into healthcare expecting patients to make good choices. I went into healthcare to help people. Covid hasn't changed that. I try to educate people about the vaccines, but if they don't want them, I don't pressure them. I respect their right to informed consent and I hope that nothing bad happens to them or their family. That's it.

But, am I upset at other nurses, who should know better, for putting extra stress on their colleagues and patients? Sure. I will own that. It's a stressful time right now, and I am human.  

Edited October 15, 2021 by SeaConquest

[Bootsie]

8 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

She is trying to draw a false equivalence between these anti-vax nurses, who go into a profession knowing that vaccines are part of the profession, and people who eat too much or drink too much in their free time. 

 

I would refer to a human who carries a loaded gun into a place and starts shooting up the place as such.  I would not refer to a human who goes into a place with the intention of working and with no idea that they are ill in that way.  Those are totally different situations as far as intent and as far as probability of doing harm.  

A discussion of whether or not nurses and other health care workers should be required to vaccinate to maintain their employment is something else--and a topic that I did not state an opinion on or provide any arguments for or against.  I think that is a very important discussion.  I think some language and some expression encourages healthy dialogue while we all wrestle with large, complex issues and I think other language cuts off conversation, is polarizing, and is not constructive.  

[Spy Car]

2 hours ago, BronzeTurtle said:

 

@KSera do you think there is going to be a point where covid is gone? do your parents think that? that may explain a lot of this conversation, actually. I don't think it's ever going to be gone. I think covid is going to be a common respiratory ailment that elderly and others can get vaccinated for and will minimize effects, but I don't think there will ever be a getting past it. And I think it will be a cause of death like the flu or other respiratory diseases. 

i'm not saying that i want old people to die of covid, but for the elderly in my life barely handled being isolated for 2020. post-vaccine they wanted to be around their kids, grandkids, nieces, nephews, grand nieces and nephews. they talk about 2020 as if they were being preserved for the sake of it but not being able to be close and visit with people was not the life they wanted to lead even if being hugged and visited for holidays meant a shorter time on earth. as in, they do not fear of dying of this one specific thing more than other respiratory things or falls or anything else. they see themselves as having a few years left being in upper 80s and don't want to spend any percentage of it without family near, without celebrating things traditionally.

 

anyway, just to say that if people think there is going to be a period in the future that will be covid free and that they are still young enough to get there, that may color perspective some. or if you feel like you don't want to die of covid specifically so you want to get to a point where that is a risk like the flu or other UR bugs? I don't know.

There is a wide continuum between being Covid-free and living in a raging pandemic that kills over 2,000 people in the USA (and many more around the world).

The difference between having a illness that poses a small threat and one that turns our nation upside down is the vaccination rate.

Anti-vaxxers/anti-maskers are messing things up for everyone.

Bill

[kbutton]

3 hours ago, SeaConquest said:

I hope every nurse that refuses to be vaccinated and boosted regularly (unless he or she has a legit medical exemption) gets kicked to the curb because those nurses clearly don't understand science and have no business being representatives of a profession that is grounded in evidence-based practice. Good riddance.  

Agreed. 

DH had to explain to a fully qualified RN in great detail why he wants a quadrivalent flu shot instead of a trivalent flu shot. He is pretty sure that she doesn't understand ANY PART of the conversation past the fact that there is Flu A and Flu B. Nothing about different strains or that having more strains accounted for in the shot would be advantageous!!!

Additionally, the most vocal people where I live are nurses advocating for our state legislature to make it illegal to ask anyone in any job (including healthcare) their vaccine status for any disease. I am so done. One of these nurses says over and over that she's not anti-vax, just anti-Covid vax. But she supports this legislation. 

I have no idea how these nurses pass their exams. We need to screen them out before they get trained. This is ridiculous. It's unreal that we need to consider the possibility of nosocomial rubella infections in pregnant women or nosocomial measles infections in 2021. 

[SlowRiver]

dp

Edited October 15, 2021 by SlowRiver

[SlowRiver]

22 hours ago, KSera said:

Again, there is no neutral choice. By not requiring vaccination, those that are vaccinated (or have medical contraindications) are being restricted in what they can do. Why should the decision making be in the favor of the people who are making a public health emergency worse?

That doesn't really answer the question, it's another question but they don't cancel out.

If we have laws based around principles that suggest compelling certain things is unethical, are we just ejecting those ideas now? Is trying to accomplish the same thing indirectly really taking that principle seriously?  People seem very hesitant to give straight answers to that kind of question.

The fact that something might save others doesn't mean it's ethical or we can just dismiss the ethical implications.Torture doesn't become ethical because it will save people from a hidden bomb. Incarcerating a bunch of people because you have a good idea that some of them might commit crimes isn't ok. It doesn't matter how many people will benefit.

[Frances]

2 hours ago, TravelingChris said:

I am not for firing people with high immunity.  I think excluding those people from work or anything else is just wrong.

But if that nurse got sick with Covid in April 2020, she most likely does not have strong antibodies.  And I don't think anti-vaccers should be in health care-   the biggest users of healthcare are people like me, people who have multiple chronic illnesses or people like cancer patients or organ failure people and others who also use lots of healthcare.  Health workers should not be trying to kill us.  Also,  I want health care workers who aren't anti-science. Because I don't trust such a person to make good decisions regarding my health or others.

And many healthcare workers feel the same as you do. They don’t want a team member who does not trust and understand science. They wish they would have been screened out before they took one of the scarce healthcare training spots and wasted limited, valuable resources. Plus, now that the weather is colder, they’d like to be able to eat and drink inside at work in non-patient areas during 10-12 hour shifts without worrying about being around unvaccinated coworkers while doing so. 
 

My husband, several close relatives, and numerous neighbors and friends are healthcare workers and this is what they tell me. They are happy about the mandates and thankful that their employers are being very strict about enforcement and exemptions, including examining past vaccination history.
 

[SlowRiver]

22 hours ago, Frances said:

At least in my state, there’s pretty much nothing an unvaccinated person is not allowed to do in society with the exception of a very, very small number of arts events and restaurants asking for proof of vaccination. As for working, while it’s true that some workers are covered by mandates, the religious exemption is here pretty much a free for all exemption (you don’t even have to be religious) and is being very widely used and abused, unless you work for a healthcare organization that already requires other vaccinations. Then there appears to be true examination of claims and prior vaccination history.

So I’d say that at least in my very blue state, unvaccinated people still have lots of autonomy and rights when it comes to living in society and working. 

This seems to vary a lot. Where I am you can't go to the pumpkin U-pick.

But what I'm more interested in is that the authorities are quite open that this is not because they think the pumpkin u-pick is dangerous. We've never even had a mask mandate for this type of activity.

They are looking to use this kind of normal activity  to pressure people into getting vaccinated. So it's not actually justified as a direct risk mitigation

[TravelingChris]

2 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

This seems to vary a lot. Where I am you can't go to the pumpkin U-pick.

But what I'm more interested in is that the authorities are quite open that this is not because they think the pumpkin u-pick is dangerous. We've never even had a mask mandate for this type of activity.

They are looking to use this kind of normal activity  to pressure people into getting vaccinated. So it's not actually justified as a direct risk mitigation

Now stupidity like this is why I am against all kinds of stupid regulations.  There is nothing wrong with pumpkin U-pick.  It is outside- not in a crowd, etc.

 

 

[Spy Car]

15 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

That doesn't really answer the question, it's another question but they don't cancel out.

If we have laws based around principles that suggest compelling certain things is unethical, are we just ejecting those ideas now? Is trying to accomplish the same thing indirectly really taking that principle seriously?  People seem very hesitant to give straight answers to that kind of question.

The fact that something might save others doesn't mean it's ethical or we can just dismiss the ethical implications.Torture doesn't become ethical because it will save people from a hidden bomb. Incarcerating a bunch of people because you have a good idea that some of them might commit crimes isn't ok. It doesn't matter how many people will benefit.

Huh? Laws are about compelling people to do things to protect other people's lives and property.

That's the basis of a civilized society.

What's next? A claim that some people should not be "compelled" to stop for red lights?

Bill

 

 

[Spy Car]

2 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

Now stupidity like this is why I am against all kinds of stupid regulations.  There is nothing wrong with pumpkin U-pick.  It is outside- not in a crowd, etc.

Where young children who are not yet eligible for vaccines are found in abundance and whose health should not be put in jeopardy by anti-mask/anti-vaxxers.

Bill

 

 

[Frances]

1 minute ago, SlowRiver said:

This seems to vary a lot. Where I am you can't go to the pumpkin U-pick.

But what I'm more interested in is that the authorities are quite open that this is not because they think the pumpkin u-pick is dangerous. We've never even had a mask mandate for this type of activity.

They are looking to use this kind of normal activity  to pressure people into getting vaccinated. So it's not actually justified as a direct risk mitigation

That’s interesting and I agree there is quite a bit of variety in the country. As far as I know, in my state the only non-work related circumstances where vaccines are required are chosen by the venue and have nothing to do with the government. So a restaurant, or fine arts or sporting venue can choose to require vaccines, but the government isn’t telling them they have to. So a private pumpkin u-pick place can decide on their own to require vaccines, but it is definitely not mandated by the government.
 

And that’s why I don’t really have an issue with people living with the consequences of their choice to not vaccinate. At least in my state, there are very few consequences for most as there are still plenty of places and events not requiring them, the majority covered by work mandates can use the almost never denied religious exemption by claiming anything they want to, and only really healthcare employers seem to be truly strict about the mandate, as I believe they should be. It’s not like anyone going into healthcare doesn’t know that vaccines are part of the job. And if someone truly can’t get it for medical reasons they will get the exemption and be accommodated.

[TravelingChris]

Just now, Spy Car said:

Where young children who are not yet eligible for vaccines are found in abundance and whose health should not be put in jeopardy by anti-mask/anti-vaxxers.

Bill

 

 

Well I didn't go to the pumpkin patch with my family last week since Dh and I were at a birding festival- birding.  But from the photographs that my family posted- there weren't near any young children except my future step-granddaughter- who is in our family group anyway.  Yes, she isn't vaccinated but everyone else is.  

Bill, I know you live in the LA area and there are tons of people there.  But many of us live in areas where we really can go to pumpkin patches and have no issues at all.  

Also, as a person who can expect a shorter lifespan or maybe a long lifespan but very disabled- I am all for living now.  Does that mean I am going to crowded bars with drunks--no, of course not.  I didn't find that a fun outing even before COVID.  And I don't go to protests, etc.  But I am going to an outdoor football game in a little less than a month and I will be so happy to go--- probably the one time in my life I get to go see my team play----- I can't be in the sun, I can't be walking up and down a lot of stairs, etc, etc.  Which makes it very hard for me to go to events spontaneously and makes it almost impossible to go to most sporting events.  I went to a hockey game last Spring after getting my first shot, wore my mask and we had to pay a lot of money for our box seats because it was the only place I could safely access-again, I can't do lots of stairs or hardly any.

[SlowRiver]

8 hours ago, SKL said:

There should be a badge on WTM for "called a liar by Spycar."  Check!

Drinking game!

[TCB]

6 hours ago, BronzeTurtle said:

Bill, if that is your real name, all I said was that they should be able to make their own decision on the vaccine without getting fired. If they are at the breaking point, i would like to afford them that grace to not have to lose their job over it. if they are at the breaking point, then they should not be fired from already understaffed and overworked healthcare facilities. if hospitals want to make it a requirement of new hires, fine. but let's not fire people who worked this whole time, to the breaking point, who elect not to have it now. if no nurses are getting fired for not taking the vaccine, if i am just making that up, then i will apologize for denying reality.

I’m a nurse and I work with some people who are refusing to get vaccinated. I can tell you from talking to them that, for many of them,  a lot of their reasoning is based on the circulating conspiracies and their political affiliations , or that they are not well informed at all. I don’t want them to lose their jobs, and I hope it does not come to that. I don’t think a vaccine mandate is an effective tool at the moment. What troubles me though, is that some of them are also inclined to not wear their masks as per the hospital rules. This isn’t all of them at all, but I think that the morally correct thing to do would be to be scrupulous about protecting others as much as they possibly can. It’s quite sickening to me how much politics plays in the actions taken during a public health event. Some of the behavior of those I thought were kind, caring people makes me sick at heart. 
 

ETA - I thought I should clarify that some of the nurses I work with, although I feel they are misinformed, are not who I was meaning when I mentioned unkind behavior. They have cared for people wonderfully well and worked extremely hard, but have been influenced by the misinformation being spread around as far as the vaccine is concerned.

Edited October 15, 2021 by TCB

[SeaConquest]

1 hour ago, Bootsie said:

I would refer to a human who carries a loaded gun into a place and starts shooting up the place as such.  I would not refer to a human who goes into a place with the intention of working and with no idea that they are ill in that way.  Those are totally different situations as far as intent and as far as probability of doing harm.  

Why? The whole issue with Covid is that you have no way to know when you're infectious. If it was as simple as taking a temperature scan, we wouldn't be in this predicament. Only about 20% of patients that are infectious even run a fever. That's why all of the places that still maintain this type of security or hygiene theatre are ludicrous.

Covid is airborne. And as long as you and I are walking around and breathing in close proximity to others, we are literally walking around with a loaded weapon that could potentially go off. Anyone who denies that is denying what we have learned about this virus in the last 20 months, which is fine for John Q Public. Disappointing, and a sad state of affairs re American society, but whatever. But, for nurses working with patients? Just...no. And, our best way at present to control the weapon is to put a trigger lock on it via masking and vaccinating, and hoping that the gun still doesn't go off. Yes, natural immunity from infection is a trigger lock as well, but again, it doesn't last forever either.   

[Spy Car]

30 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

Well I didn't go to the pumpkin patch with my family last week since Dh and I were at a birding festival- birding.  But from the photographs that my family posted- there weren't near any young children except my future step-granddaughter- who is in our family group anyway.  Yes, she isn't vaccinated but everyone else is.  

Bill, I know you live in the LA area and there are tons of people there.  But many of us live in areas where we really can go to pumpkin patches and have no issues at all.  

Also, as a person who can expect a shorter lifespan or maybe a long lifespan but very disabled- I am all for living now.  Does that mean I am going to crowded bars with drunks--no, of course not.  I didn't find that a fun outing even before COVID.  And I don't go to protests, etc.  But I am going to an outdoor football game in a little less than a month and I will be so happy to go--- probably the one time in my life I get to go see my team play----- I can't be in the sun, I can't be walking up and down a lot of stairs, etc, etc.  Which makes it very hard for me to go to events spontaneously and makes it almost impossible to go to most sporting events.  I went to a hockey game last Spring after getting my first shot, wore my mask and we had to pay a lot of money for our box seats because it was the only place I could safely access-again, I can't do lots of stairs or hardly any.

I want you to live and to enjoy your time on earth. Everyone should have the joy of participating in life.

Protecting others (and ourselves) is very easy. Masks are a small inconvenience during a deadly pandemic and the vaccines are safe and effective.

Putting others at risk is not OK and risking one's own health, because why?, isn't a reasoned position.

You know this.

If people would do the right thing we could return to a far more normal world.

We can do it. Some won't. I don't understand why.

Bill

 

[SlowRiver]

5 hours ago, BronzeTurtle said:

 

@KSera do you think there is going to be a point where covid is gone? do your parents think that? that may explain a lot of this conversation, actually. I don't think it's ever going to be gone. I think covid is going to be a common respiratory ailment that elderly and others can get vaccinated for and will minimize effects, but I don't think there will ever be a getting past it. And I think it will be a cause of death like the flu or other respiratory diseases. 

i'm not saying that i want old people to die of covid, but for the elderly in my life barely handled being isolated for 2020. post-vaccine they wanted to be around their kids, grandkids, nieces, nephews, grand nieces and nephews. they talk about 2020 as if they were being preserved for the sake of it but not being able to be close and visit with people was not the life they wanted to lead even if being hugged and visited for holidays meant a shorter time on earth. as in, they do not fear of dying of this one specific thing more than other respiratory things or falls or anything else. they see themselves as having a few years left being in upper 80s and don't want to spend any percentage of it without family near, without celebrating things traditionally.

 

anyway, just to say that if people think there is going to be a period in the future that will be covid free and that they are still young enough to get there, that may color perspective some. or if you feel like you don't want to die of covid specifically so you want to get to a point where that is a risk like the flu or other UR bugs? I don't know.

I think this is a big factor.

There is a group that thinks there will be a way out. When there are enough people vaccinated seems to be the thing they are looking for at the moment. If everyone gets their boosters. If people follow the masking rules. Eventually it will die out or become rare and the people at more risk will be safe. These people are very focused on everyone doing the right things so life can go back to normal. It seems worth it to push for these things, even when the protocols have costs or we might be impinging on civil liberties.

And the people who think it will be endemic, and eventually most people will get it at various points. (Which seems to be the more dominant view among epidemiologists at the moment.) That leads to a whole different set of calculations when you are weighing up the costs of various pandemic measures. It raises the real question of whether vaccines for children are actually preferable to infection, or vice versa, because it's not at all clear it's the former. It means that vulnerable people will always be more at risk in the same way they are for other illnesses. That a certain number of old people will have it as their final illness, rather than something else. The balance weighing against measures isn't as clear especially since you would have to go on with the measures forever. It means asking, what types of things are sustainable in a permanent scenario with covid in the population? What are people willing to give up, permanently?

 

[KSera]

55 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

This seems to vary a lot. Where I am you can't go to the pumpkin U-pick.

But what I'm more interested in is that the authorities are quite open that this is not because they think the pumpkin u-pick is dangerous. We've never even had a mask mandate for this type of activity.

Well, that sounds weird, unless you're in a very crowded area. For the pumpkin patches I've been to, masks would be plenty sufficient, for those times when you might be too close to other people. We have other venues that require vaccines or testing, but the only outdoor ones are ones with large crowds, like outdoor concerts.

And this seems like a good time to reiterate, that for most of those things that apply to the general public, the rule is vaccine OR negative test. The vast majority of people are not in any position where they are being "forced" to get a vaccine for anything. For some reason, people against vaccines have a tendency to lean heavy on the "forced to vaccinate" and ignore the fact that testing is an option (yes, I realize there are jobs where that isn't the case--HCW for example--but for most of the things people are upset about, testing is an alternative.

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

And the people who think it will be endemic, and eventually most people will get it at various points. (Which seems to be the more dominant view among epidemiologists at the moment.) That leads to a whole different set of calculations when you are weighing up the costs of various pandemic measures. It raises the real question of whether vaccines for children are actually preferable to infection, or vice versa, because it's not at all clear it's the former. It means that vulnerable people will always be more at risk in the same way they are for other illnesses. That a certain number of old people will have it as their final illness, rather than something else.

Endemic does not mean accepting the current level of death. I can't understand anyone thinking the current level of preventable death is acceptable. The "various costs" of the pandemic measures we're talking about are low. Masks and vaccines are not a high burden. Vaccines shouldn't have to be required. Everyone should want to do their part to prevent people from dying and to get this disease down to low circulating levels. Is 200,000 totally preventable deaths of Americans since vaccines were available this Spring an acceptable price to you? Why?

This particular post is particularly upsetting to me.

[Bootsie]

20 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

Why? The whole issue with Covid is that you have no way to know when you're infectious. If it was as simple as taking a temperature scan, we wouldn't be in this predicament. Only about 20% of patients that are infectious even run a fever. That's why all of the places that still maintain this type of security or hygiene theatre are ludicrous.

Covid is airborne. And as long as you and I are walking around and breathing in close proximity to others, we are literally walking around with a loaded weapon that could potentially go off. Anyone who denies that is denying what we have learned about this virus in the last 20 months, which is fine for John Q Public. Disappointing, and a sad state of affairs re American society, but whatever. But, for nurses working with patients? Just...no. And, our best way at present to control the weapon is to put a trigger lock on it via masking and vaccinating, and hoping that the gun still doesn't go off. Yes, natural immunity from infection is a trigger lock as well, but again, it doesn't last forever either.   

Is this true?  Are each of us literally walking around with a loaded weapon?  Or are only those who are infected walking around with a loaded weapon.  If each us is literally a walking loaded weapon just because we are walking and breathing, I have missed that part of the education of COVID.  

I understand that we do not know the instance someone is ill and contagious.  So, there are some people walking around who are unknowingly contagious.  And from my understanding of the statistics it is not even a majority of the people who are walking around who are contagious.  If I am wrong and each of us is contagious just simply walking and breathing, please educate me.  Or, if that is not the case, I can see having a discussion of how do we approach a situation in which someone might be carrying a highly contagious virus with might infect me without their knowing it being fruitful. But it seems illogical to me to assume that each person is literally walking around as a loaded gun and intentionally going off with the intent to harm others.

[SlowRiver]

1 hour ago, Spy Car said:

Huh? Laws are about compelling people to do things to protect other people's lives and property.

That's the basis of a civilized society.

What's next? A claim that some people should not be "compelled" to stop for red lights?

Bill

 

 

I can't imagine that you have failed to notice that there are basic legal principles and rights which restrict the kinds of things society can compell us to do.

And had you bothered to read the chain of comments, you would realise that I am talking about situations where we recognize that the principle applies, but the law is trying to find alternate ways to compel people anyway. 

I don't imagine you'll bother to actually answer in a thoughtful way, [edited by moderator for vulgarity.]

[Spy Car]

Just now, SlowRiver said:

I can't imagine that you have failed to notice that there are basic legal principles and rights which restrict the kinds of things society can compell us to do.

And had you bothered to read the chain of comments, you would realise that I am talking about situations where we recognize that the principle applies, but the law is trying to find alternate ways to compel people anyway. 

I don't imagine you'll bother to actually answer in a thoughtful way, since you mainly seem to get off on dick swinging in rooms full of women. I suppose there is a first time for everything though.

Please stop with the disgusting sexist comments.

I understand the purpose of laws in civilized societies. They are in place to protect the lives and property of decent, ethical, law abiding people from those who have no regard for morality or human life. Full stop.

Bill

[SlowRiver]

7 minutes ago, KSera said:

Endemic does not mean accepting the current level of death. I can't understand anyone thinking the current level of preventable death is acceptable. The "various costs" of the pandemic measures we're talking about are low. Masks and vaccines are not a high burden. Vaccines shouldn't have to be required. Everyone should want to do their part to prevent people from dying and to get this disease down to low circulating levels. Is 200,000 totally preventable deaths of Americans since vaccines were available this Spring an acceptable price to you? Why?

This particular post is particularly upsetting to me.

Endemic can mean any levels of death, I have no idea why you would think otherwise. Diseases that kill large numbers of people sometimes burn themselves out, but covid is unlikely to do that, especially as is by far worst for people past reproductive age.

That's just not what endemic means. We don't get to choose if diseases become endemic.

Look, we could take the approaches of some authoritarian regimes and have no or almost no covid, but we don't because we consider their measures to be immoral, and the trade-offs false coin. If the only consideration was preventing deaths, those kinds of measures would be justifiable.

Not everyone agrees with your assessments of the issues and it's not all because they are very stupid or ignorant, and the research by the way does not support that view. It's most often because they do not see the trade offs from the same perspective, or they put weight on somewhat different research elements.

Even more people who are vaccinated themselves and would encourage others to do so have real problems with the way it's being pushed by pressure by state or society. That long term it's not going to result in many people changing behaviour but will in fact lose a lot of trust. Or they are concerned with the kinds of legal precedents that will come out of this that will affect all kinds of areas of law, or that there is increasing acceptance of authoritarianism. Some have just observed that temporary powers (like income tax) are very rarely willingly given up by states, or employers, or corporate bodies.

 

[SlowRiver]

29 minutes ago, KSera said:

Well, that sounds weird, unless you're in a very crowded area. For the pumpkin patches I've been to, masks would be plenty sufficient, for those times when you might be too close to other people. We have other venues that require vaccines or testing, but the only outdoor ones are ones with large crowds, like outdoor concerts.

And this seems like a good time to reiterate, that for most of those things that apply to the general public, the rule is vaccine OR negative test. The vast majority of people are not in any position where they are being "forced" to get a vaccine for anything. For some reason, people against vaccines have a tendency to lean heavy on the "forced to vaccinate" and ignore the fact that testing is an option (yes, I realize there are jobs where that isn't the case--HCW for example--but for most of the things people are upset about, testing is an alternative.

No, it's not crowded.

And it isn't weird. As I said, they do not think that these activities are dangerous. We have not, and never have had, an outdoor mask mandate. They do not think covid will be passed at the pumpkin patch.

They are not trying to mitigate a risky behaviour here. They are trying to "encourage" people to do something they cannot require by law.

[KSera]

6 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

Endemic can mean any levels of death, I have no idea why you would think otherwise

You didn't understand my post, then. I didn't say endemic meant low level of death, I said that just because it becomes endemic doesn't mean we have to accept the current level of death. We don't turn off doing anything to mitigate an illness just because it's become endemic. Flu is endemic and we still take precautions, require nurses to be vaccinated, etc. I wanted to know why the current level of death would be acceptable to you when it is preventable?

Edited October 15, 2021 by KSera
left out a word