I feel so frustrated about people refusing vaccination…

[Spy Car]

6 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

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.

 

It is not only authoritarian states have taken effective anti-Covid measures.

All it requires if for people to do the right things to protect life.

Why oh why is that so difficult?

What drives people to act so recklessly?

Bill

[TravelingChris]

38 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

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

 

Well I think that some people don't have good reasoning abillity.  We were driving home from the birding festival and even there, we kept hearing ads for some app which supposedly pays you up to 25cents per gallon when you fill up.  Anyway, this woman in the ad was saying that she makes 200 to 300 dollars a month using this app.  That makes no sense at all unless she has a massive truck company or some other giant vehicle company.  And as my dh was saying, this ad depending on people being innumerate.  Many people are innumerate and they can\t understand how dangerous Delta is, they can't understand mutations of viruses or anything, they don't understand anything at all.

A friend of us posted on Facebook one of these stupid comments about how we don't understand ham radios, internet, etc,. so don't think we can understand medicine.  Well he mentioned that he does understand ham radio, and my dh answered, so does he and he also understand internet and whatever other stupid things they had listed.  And this was about how we shouldn't rely of google for medicine advice.  I didn't comment but I could have that my internet medical research has brought many things to light to my physicians, who don't have the same time I do to do research.  

[KSera]

6 minutes ago, KSera said:

I wanted to know why the current level of death would be acceptable to you when it is preventable?

I'm wondering how many stories you have read of the people dying of vaccine misinformation? I could post dozens of links here to people who believed anti vax stuff they read and then got sick and regretted it terribly and urged others to get vaccinated and then died themselves. What would you say to those people and about those stories when you read them? Does it seem tragic to you that they all died due to people talking them out of the vaccine that would have saved their lives had they gotten it?

[SeaConquest]

40 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

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.

Are we really arguing about this while over 700,000 people have died in this country? Perhaps, you are from another country that hasn't been ravaged as severely by this virus. Perhaps, you haven't seen the virus up close for the past 20 months, and the devastation that it has wrought to so many friends, colleagues, and patients in your life. If that is the case, consider yourself very very fortunate indeed. I actually count myself among the incredibly lucky because everyone in my immediate family has remained healthy to date, as have all of my parents and stepparents (who are Republicans and, to be honest, really could have gone down the rabbit hole). My marriage has also survived the pandemic (not so among many of my friends), as has our small business throughout the lockdown/difficult business climate in CA (enough said there). I also managed to graduate on time from nursing school, even though my clinicals in CA were shut down, and my cohort had to fly to another state to finish our program. So while none of this has been easy, I still consider myself very fortunate and am incredibly grateful for the privilege of access to these life-saving vaccines.    

So, yes, if you have no way to know whether you are infectious or not, because you can be asymptomatic, and rapid home tests are still not readily available in this country, then when you are a nurse, you have a duty to your patients, who are relying on you for their safety, to err on the side of caution and assume that you are walking around with a loaded weapon. Therefore, IMO you *must* take the necessary precautions (masking + vaccinating) because, to do otherwise, and err on the side of assuming that you are healthy until proven otherwise, is to put your patients at risk because we know how Covid spreads silently and asymptomatically. And this choice, as I have said repeatedly, is a breach of your ethical duties as a nurse and grounds for termination by your employer.  

Edited October 15, 2021 by SeaConquest

[Spy Car]

1 minute ago, TravelingChris said:

Well I think that some people don't have good reasoning abillity.  We were driving home from the birding festival and even there, we kept hearing ads for some app which supposedly pays you up to 25cents per gallon when you fill up.  Anyway, this woman in the ad was saying that she makes 200 to 300 dollars a month using this app.  That makes no sense at all unless she has a massive truck company or some other giant vehicle company.  And as my dh was saying, this ad depending on people being innumerate.  Many people are innumerate and they can\t understand how dangerous Delta is, they can't understand mutations of viruses or anything, they don't understand anything at all.

A friend of us posted on Facebook one of these stupid comments about how we don't understand ham radios, internet, etc,. so don't think we can understand medicine.  Well he mentioned that he does understand ham radio, and my dh answered, so does he and he also understand internet and whatever other stupid things they had listed.  And this was about how we shouldn't rely of google for medicine advice.  I didn't comment but I could have that my internet medical research has brought many things to light to my physicians, who don't have the same time I do to do research.  

I also realize that many people are being fed misinformation by a variety of sources. It is sad.

I wish people fully understood the contagiousness of the Delta variant.

An RO of 6 means that on average each person who contracts Delta will in turn infect 6 others. Some of those people may not survive. Most of those people will be unvaccinated. I don't know what it is going to take for people to see reason.

Very distressing.

I hope you stay well and enjoy your life.

Bill

 

[Spy Car]

6 minutes ago, KSera said:

I'm wondering how many stories you have read of the people dying of vaccine misinformation? I could post dozens of links here to people who believed anti vax stuff they read and then got sick and regretted it terribly and urged others to get vaccinated and then died themselves. What would you say to those people and about those stories when you read them? Does it seem tragic to you that they all died due to people talking them out of the vaccine that would have saved their lives had they gotten it?

So many stories of people dying and them saying as they exit that they've made a terrible mistake. Urging others to change their minds.

And then the occasional story of people dying while they claim Covid is a hoax.

I dunno sometimes.

This virus will keep killing people who are unvaccinated. Perhaps that will eventually make an impression? There will be too many needless deaths.

Far too many already.

Bill

Edited October 15, 2021 by Spy Car

[TarynB]

20 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

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

Incorrect. Actually we do choose whether or not diseases become or remain endemic. Our response as a society, our willingness to take preventive measures, determines that.

That's exactly how we finally eliminated smallpox (thanks to Dr. Edward Jenner) which was endemic for literally thousands of years. By 1980, smallpox was finally declared eliminated due to global vaccination. We do have a choice in how we respond to disease.

[SlowRiver]

26 minutes ago, KSera said:

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?

I don't think that's a particularly answerable question. Because as I said, we might get it to zero, if were willing to ignore civil liberties, forcibly quarantine people at any cost, etc. But those measures aren't ok, no matter how many people they save.

In an endemic situation we are talking about what kinds of measure should be permanent. I would say that anything that is a civil liberty infringement is not acceptable - so that would mean travel restrictions, and probably most proof of vaccination other than select areas like health. I also think that mask mandates shouldn't be permanent. Lockdown and gathering limits would also be out. Restrictions on people in nursing and care homes need to go too. 

As far as testing, it needs to be done in a way that's proportionate in terms of the costs and hours involved, like all ongoing health initiatives.

Quarantining for the ill is still a good idea though how to best use testing with this requires some thought. More emphasis and maybe money spent on some cleaning and especially air circulation. Beefing up of some hospital capacities may be required, moving to a more robust procurement system. 

If 10 years from now we still have so many extra people dying from covid, research into better treatments may be the best course, but it may be we never find an answer.

[SlowRiver]

15 minutes ago, TarynB said:

Incorrect. Actually we do choose whether or not diseases become or remain endemic. Our response as a society, our willingness to take preventive measures, determines that.

That's exactly how we finally eliminated smallpox (thanks to Dr. Edward Jenner) which was endemic for literally thousands of years. By 1980, smallpox was finally declared eliminated due to global vaccination. We do have a choice in how we respond to disease.

You know smallpox is literally the only human disease that we have managed to do that with, and it is not a disease anything like covid. Some people think that polio might be another we could eliminate but notably, no one has yet. Again, not a disease like covid.

There is only one animal disease we've eliminated too, even when we can cull whole populations.

If you think that's an answer you are living in a dreamworld and you will have a very unrealistic sense of what to do about problems like this.

Nature did a survey not long ago of immunologists, virologists, etc - 90% said they did not think it could be eliminated.

[Bootsie]

27 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

Are we really arguing about this while over 700,000 people have died in this country? Perhaps, you are from another country that hasn't been ravaged as severely by this virus. Perhaps, you haven't seen the virus up close for the past 20 months, and the devastation that it has wrought to so many friends, colleagues, and patients in your life. If that is the case, consider yourself very very fortunate indeed. I actually count myself among the incredibly lucky because everyone in my immediate family has remained healthy to date, as have all of my parents and stepparents (who are Republicans and, to be honest, really could have gone down the rabbit hole). My marriage has also survived the pandemic (not so among many of my friends), as has our small business throughout the lockdown/difficult business climate in CA (enough said there). I also managed to graduate on time from nursing school, even though my clinicals in CA were shut down, and my cohort had to fly to another state to finish our program. So while none of this has been easy, I still consider myself very fortunate and am incredibly grateful for the privilege of access to these life-saving vaccines.    

So, yes, if you have no way to know whether you are infectious or not, because you can be asymptomatic, and rapid home tests are still not readily available in this country, then when you are a nurse, you have a duty to your patients, who are relying on you for their safety, to err on the side of caution and assume that you are walking around with a loaded weapon. Therefore, IMO you *must* take the necessary precautions (masking + vaccinating) because, to do otherwise, and err on the side of assuming that you are healthy until proven otherwise, is to put your patients at risk because we know how Covid spreads silently and asymptomatically. And this choice, as I have said repeatedly, is a breach of your ethical duties as a nurse and grounds for termination by your employer.  

The number of people who have died is tragic.  That does not change the fact of whether or not every person who is walking and breathing is literally a loaded gun.  You are the one who said that and that anyone who denies that hasn't learned what we know about this virus.  But, when I ask to be educated if that is really the case, your response is about how many people have died, your personal situation, the party affilation of your family members. and avoided the claim that you made.  

I am vaccinated, so you do not need to educate me about the benefits of a vaccine.  At this point, I see no evidence that it is reasonable to assume that every person I come in contact with is a loaded gun.  I think I would have a difficult time ineteracting in the world and with other humans if that was my underlying assumption.  I also know people who are vaccine hesitant that become more hesitant when they hear these types of claims being made (and told that if they deny that they haven't learned anything).  Therefore, I will choose to speak with them differently, hoping to do more good than harm.  

[KSera]

12 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

I don't think that's a particularly answerable question. Because as I said, we might get it to zero, if were willing to ignore civil liberties, forcibly quarantine people at any cost, etc. But those measures aren't ok, no matter how many people they save.

In an endemic situation we are talking about what kinds of measure should be permanent. I would say that anything that is a civil liberty infringement is not acceptable - so that would mean travel restrictions, and probably most proof of vaccination other than select areas like health. I also think that mask mandates shouldn't be permanent. Lockdown and gathering limits would also be out. Restrictions on people in nursing and care homes need to go too. 

As far as testing, it needs to be done in a way that's proportionate in terms of the costs and hours involved, like all ongoing health initiatives.

Quarantining for the ill is still a good idea though how to best use testing with this requires some thought. More emphasis and maybe money spent on some cleaning and especially air circulation. Beefing up of some hospital capacities may be required, moving to a more robust procurement system. 

If 10 years from now we still have so many extra people dying from covid, research into better treatments may be the best course, but it may be we never find an answer.

I'm not sure what question you meant wasn't answerable, because you answered a question I didn't ask. I didn't ask anything about getting to zero covid. I asked why the current level of death was acceptable when it's preventable.

As far as your suggested mitigation measures, I noted nothing there about providing people better education so that more people would understand the vaccines and would get vaccinated so they didn't get sick and/or die. Wouldn't that be high on the list of what we need to do?

The fact that you'd be fine with another 10 years of this level of unnecessary death before trying to do something different is stunning to me.

7 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

You know smallpox is literally the only human disease that we have managed to do that with, and it is not a disease anything like covid. Some people think that polio might be another we could eliminate but notably, no one has yet. Again, not a disease like covid.

There is only one animal disease we've eliminated too, even when we can cull whole populations.

If you think that's an answer you are living in a dreamworld and you will have a very unrealistic sense of what to do about problems like this.

Nature did a survey not long ago of immunologists, virologists, etc - 90% said they did not think it could be eliminated.

You have a very black and white way of looking at this. The options aren't eliminate it or let it run wild. The fact that the scientists in Nature didn't think Covid19 couldn't be eliminated isn't because they thought it had to stay at current levels. I don't know any prominent virus scientists advocating for that. We have tons of diseases that are rare because of vaccines. We don't have to eliminate it for it to become something that no longer dominates our hospitals and society. If we had the vaccination levels we have for other diseases, we'd be in a totally different stage of this thing.

[TarynB]

31 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

You know smallpox is literally the only human disease that we have managed to do that with, and it is not a disease anything like covid. Some people think that polio might be another we could eliminate but notably, no one has yet. Again, not a disease like covid.

There is only one animal disease we've eliminated too, even when we can cull whole populations.

If you think that's an answer you are living in a dreamworld and you will have a very unrealistic sense of what to do about problems like this.

Nature did a survey not long ago of immunologists, virologists, etc - 90% said they did not think it could be eliminated.

I know exactly which article in Nature you're referring to. It was published back in February.  And the scientists surveyed for that article, and many others who have spoken out, believe covid will not be eliminated, not because it can't be, but because of how our society is responding to it. 

Quote

“It’s possible. We don’t seem to be prepared to do it and take the collective action that it’s going to require.” -- Scott Gottlieb, former head of the FDA

 

[bookbard]

55 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

You know smallpox is literally the only human disease that we have managed to do that with, and it is not a disease anything like covid.

Measles is no longer endemic in Australia. This is because of high vaccination. Same goes for - polio, diptheria, rubella, probably a lot of other ones. And covid had been 100% eliminated from Australia . . . until an infected air crew from the US arrived in June this year. If those air crew had been vaccinated (which they could have by June this year), hundreds of lives would have been saved and literally billions of dollars. 

That's why some of us feel frustrated at anti-vaxxers. 

 

[Spy Car]

1 hour ago, SlowRiver said:

You know smallpox is literally the only human disease that we have managed to do that with, and it is not a disease anything like covid. Some people think that polio might be another we could eliminate but notably, no one has yet. Again, not a disease like covid.

There is only one animal disease we've eliminated too, even when we can cull whole populations.

If you think that's an answer you are living in a dreamworld and you will have a very unrealistic sense of what to do about problems like this.

Nature did a survey not long ago of immunologists, virologists, etc - 90% said they did not think it could be eliminated.

 

Baloney. The USA has not had a case of polio in a generation. Thanks to widespread vaccinations.

I went to school with a lovely girl who was the only person of my generation that I knew who contracted polio. It left her lower body pretty deformed, but she could still walk and was popular despite her disability.

Most of us escaped polio because our parents made sure we were protected by vaccines.

We have reduced many diseases down to almost zero threat, thanks to vaccines.

Anti-vaxxers are costing lives and extending this pandemic.

Wrong side of history, wrong side of science, and the wrong side of morality.

Bill

[bookbard]

Actually, those of you concerned about civil liberties, where are you in regards to laws about smoking?

I don't know the laws in the US, but in Australia, you can't smoke indoors except in your own house. You can't smoke in your own car if there's anyone under 18 in it. You can't smoke within a certain distance of a school or playground. There are strict rules around buying and selling, and there is strictly no advertising, even on the actual packages, which must be plain. And certain medical procedures are off-limits to you - my neighbour had to have weekly? monthly? blood tests to measure the nicotine in her blood before she was allowed to have her operation. 

Mandates around smoking have made life a LOT better for a lot of people - but it has sucked for smokers. Thank goodness their 'civil liberties' didn't trump the rest of the population.

[Spy Car]

23 minutes ago, bookbard said:

Actually, those of you concerned about civil liberties, where are you in regards to laws about smoking?

I don't know the laws in the US, but in Australia, you can't smoke indoors except in your own house. You can't smoke in your own car if there's anyone under 18 in it. You can't smoke within a certain distance of a school or playground. There are strict rules around buying and selling, and there is strictly no advertising, even on the actual packages, which must be plain. And certain medical procedures are off-limits to you - my neighbour had to have weekly? monthly? blood tests to measure the nicotine in her blood before she was allowed to have her operation. 

Mandates around smoking have made life a LOT better for a lot of people - but it has sucked for smokers. Thank goodness their 'civil liberties' didn't trump the rest of the population.

I think some people are deeply confused--or just disingenuous--when they claim to have a civil right to cause others harm, illness, and death.

It doesn't work that way.

Smoking causes great harm, so called "second hand smoke" included.

Finally those who were sick of having our right to breathe air that's unpolluted by cigarette smoke said "enough!"

That's why we have laws. To constrain those who don't give a damn about inflicting harm on others.

Bill

[BronzeTurtle]

9 hours ago, MercyA said:

@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.) 😉 

I tried to message you to answer but it says you can't get messages? Or maybe i can't send them. Short answer yes at one point I'm pretty sure I had an account from buying something from Susan Wise Bauer's site when it was a different company. But it looked way different than this and I wouldn't be able to tell you my login name if you offered me a million bucks for it. i haven't replied anymore tonight because i genuinely wish you all well, get vaccinated, get your loved ones vaccinated and i hope to have a more productive day in my own home tomorrow!

[Guest]

Actually, those of you concerned about civil liberties, where are you in regards to laws about smoking?

 

Its such a good point. And it’s one thing I don’t understand; as I have said already, as a society, we accept many measures that are personally inconvenient, unpleasant or annoying for the benefit of society. And I remember well the “But My Rights!!” aspect of a bunch of them. I remember people arguing against car safety seat laws because, “*I* was never in a car seat in my life and *I* survived!” And helmet laws: “If I want to take a chance of splattering my brains on Rt 70 while riding my Harley, that is my choice!” And people who resisted the law to have a fence around their pools because, “I don’t even have any non-swimming kids; why do I have to put up an ugly fence around the pool in my own yard!” 
 

Not to mention the vaccination requirements already in place all across the US. There are 100 years of legal precedent supporting the fact that governments/municipalities *can* require vaccination to defend the public health. (As in Jacobsen v. State of Massachusetts.) 

BTW, my book club was lively last night, as two members expressed these opposing views as well. 

 

[LMD]

I don't agree that the smoking analogy is a good one, I wouldn't agree with mandating that everyone needs to quit smoking within 2 weeks, and provide the medical proof to their employer, or lose their jobs (and not be able to get another). Also, it is easily and clearly seen if a person is putting harmful second hand smoke in the air, every smoker is making a proactive choice to do that. Someone who hasn't had a covid vaccine isn't necessarily carrying the virus, or they may be carrying asymptomatically - not deliberate nor intentional, especially with different lifestyle risks (like rural areas with zero cases). Likewise, in some cases fully vaccinated people are carrying and spreading it. There are no smokers or non-smokers unknowingly and unnoticeably spreading cigarette smoke.

Nor is stopping smoking the same as mandating a medical treatment.

Our laws around smoking stop at the line of actual bodily interference or privacy in the home - and I would argue that those are very unambiguous lines for good reason. 

The smoking laws were introduced incrementally, and included a lot of education. I would support both broad and targeted vaccine education campaigns, I would support financial incentives (family tax benefits or other government payments contingent on vaccine - I'm pretty sure ftb is already dependant upon following the immunisation schedule? Tax breaks? Flat out bonuses?) Strict medicare rules possibly - I wouldn't want to see emergency care withheld but I could entertain a discussion on vaccinated people being prioritised on non-emergency care waiting lists. 

our vaccinated numbers are rising fast. We have a good history of high vaccination rates. There were options other than - as in vic - widespread mandates that have zero respect for our state human rights charter or national constitution. I am extremely disturbed by how easily these are tossed aside in an emergency.

Edited October 15, 2021 by LMD

[SlowRiver]

6 hours ago, KSera said:

I'm not sure what question you meant wasn't answerable, because you answered a question I didn't ask. I didn't ask anything about getting to zero covid. I asked why the current level of death was acceptable when it's preventable.

As far as your suggested mitigation measures, I noted nothing there about providing people better education so that more people would understand the vaccines and would get vaccinated so they didn't get sick and/or die. Wouldn't that be high on the list of what we need to do?

The fact that you'd be fine with another 10 years of this level of unnecessary death before trying to do something different is stunning to me.

You have a very black and white way of looking at this. The options aren't eliminate it or let it run wild. The fact that the scientists in Nature didn't think Covid19 couldn't be eliminated isn't because they thought it had to stay at current levels. I don't know any prominent virus scientists advocating for that. We have tons of diseases that are rare because of vaccines. We don't have to eliminate it for it to become something that no longer dominates our hospitals and society. If we had the vaccination levels we have for other diseases, we'd be in a totally different stage of this thing.

What are you talking about? I haven' suggested that vaccines aren't a useful tool. And I did suggest that there are some concrete measures we could take. You and a lot of others on this thread keep assuming that people who aren't in agreement with you are anti-vaccination in general, or don't think people should get this vaccination, or that there shouldn't be measures to try and mitigate covid effects, etc. While at the same time you aren't really addressing any issues around what long term management could or should look like, around ethical issues, and seem to have a deeply unrealistic sense that if only everyone does whatever, we'll be fine.

But this idea that we can decide on some level of death that we think is ok and then we just do whatever is necessary to achieve that is crazy. What if what it takes means locking people in secure units? What if everything we are willing to do doesn't get us to that level? Are there any limits to what we think it is ok to do? The idea that we have total control here is just some kind of self-comfort bedtime story.

I'm sorry to tell you that outside of the US, there are countries, like mine, that have excellent vaccination levels, and covid has not receded in the same way that diseases lime measles or polio have. It's not the same kind of disease and it's just not directly comparable. 

There is nothing wrong with vaccine education but this idea that the main reason for people not vaccinating is lack of education is rather naive from what I can see. In the US people with the highest levels of education are as likely, maybe more likely, to be hesitant with regards to covid vaccines as those with low education. There was also a very interesting study to come out of MIT recently about the data literacy of those taking a variety of more skeptical positions on a number of public health measures, and found that understanding the information was really not the problem, in fact that group often had a less naive understanding of the scientific process than the pro-people. They concluded that more data wasn't the way forward to changing people's minds. (Unfortunately their suggestions for a way forward were a little foggy.)

A lot of the best guesses right now are that covid will be like flu, it will be a yearly thing that comes in regular waves. That doesn't mean it will only be as dangerous as the flu, even with vaccination. It may be more dangerous for a long time. It may evolve to become less serious which isn't uncommon. We may find that, like some other viruses, if people get it as children they are less likely to have serious effects as adults. Right now we don't know and a multiplicity of ideas and approaches is not necessarily a bad thing. Some skepticism and asking questions are not bad things. 

But the approach of trying to force people into vaccination isn't exactly working where you are, or anywhere else, so I'm not sure why people think it's the way forward. Germany decided against that kind of approach for just that reason, they felt it would create a public divide that would ultimately take them away from their goal. 

[SlowRiver]

6 hours ago, bookbard said:

Measles is no longer endemic in Australia. This is because of high vaccination. Same goes for - polio, diptheria, rubella, probably a lot of other ones. And covid had been 100% eliminated from Australia . . . until an infected air crew from the US arrived in June this year. If those air crew had been vaccinated (which they could have by June this year), hundreds of lives would have been saved and literally billions of dollars. 

That's why some of us feel frustrated at anti-vaxxers. 

 

Being vaccinated doesn't mean they would not have brought covid. Unless you are going to close borders permanently, you aren't going to keep it out.

[TravelingChris]

8 hours ago, TarynB said:

Incorrect. Actually we do choose whether or not diseases become or remain endemic. Our response as a society, our willingness to take preventive measures, determines that.

That's exactly how we finally eliminated smallpox (thanks to Dr. Edward Jenner) which was endemic for literally thousands of years. By 1980, smallpox was finally declared eliminated due to global vaccination. We do have a choice in how we respond to disease.

No, we really don't.  Please don't say we know all there is about this virus- because we really don't./  As far as I know, only one infectious disease has been eradicated and that is smallpox.  But we don't have enough of anything to eradicate this disease.  Plus there is still so much garbage being said out there- six feet separation, plastic barriers, wipe down pens, and on and on.  Why no one wants to talk about the paid but fantastic research of the Spanish dance party in December of 2020 where there was fantastic air circulation, people wore masks except when drinking, and no one got COVID?  There was just so much misinformation.  

For one thing, why aren't 23andme, etc telling us if we are susceptible particularly to COVID?  They do know that there are some genes that make you very susceptible. And then there are the genes that make you less susceptible too-or maybe the meds you take.  After all, I think I am taking about five of the meds that have been proposed to lessen illness. Maybe the vaccinations plus my meds protect me.  

But we have had bad outcomes and currently having bad outcomes in states where lots of people have been vacced and states where almost no one has been.  We have had countries that have shut down and had good results (mainly areas like New Zealand that can really shut down), and countries where they shut down and had lousy results.

[Faith-manor]

6 hours ago, Spy Car said:

 

Baloney. The USA has not had a case of polio in a generation. Thanks to widespread vaccinations.

I went to school with a lovely girl who was the only person of my generation that I knew who contracted polio. It left her lower body pretty deformed, but she could still walk and was popular despite her disability.

Most of us escaped polio because our parents made sure we were protected by vaccines.

We have reduced many diseases down to almost zero threat, thanks to vaccines.

Anti-vaxxers are costing lives and extending this pandemic.

Wrong side of history, wrong side of science, and the wrong side of morality.

Bill

Thank you! 100% spot on.

My great uncle died at 7 years of age from diphtheria. It was a gruesome, horrible way to die, and left his family with PTSD from tending him. Then there was a vaccine. Hoe many people have died of it since then in the US? .......the sound of crickets.

SCOTUS had held up, time and time again, that the individual right to anything stops with that person's body. An individual right does not get to trample everyone else's rights. Additionally, it has ruled that the good of the many outweighs the good of the one. NYC used to lock down so hard in the summers when polio went around that patents could be arrested for allowing their children to play outside, or for families with children to socialize. It was legal. Quarantine's were enforced by armed law enforcement if necessary. When my above uncle had diphtheria, the sheriff kept deputies at the driveway to ensure no one in the town or family attempted to violate the quarantine of their family. Grocery orders were placed on paper, put on the front step by my great-grandfather who had to wear a bandana over his mouth and nose just to exit the house to do that much or face legal retribution for NOT doing it. Once back inside, a deputy wearing leather gloves and bandana would fetch that paper and send a runner to the grocer with it. Deliveries were made, the deputies handled getting it to the front door. The only person allowed inside was the doctor, and he did the best he could for PPE. Washable coat, face mask he made for himself, leather gloves, covers that he made for his shoes. He would go back to his home and boil his clothes. This kind of vigilance and quarantine kept it from going wild and killing many more children. At no time did my great grandparents indicated they felt their rights were being violated. During the 1918 flu pandemic, San Francisco had a mask mandate and arrested violators. The fines were steep when one considers income in that time. This was also not a constitutional violation.

The number dead is mind boggling. The number who have long covid and will need temporary and possibly permanent help is an ungodly, unholy, immoral number. I am 100% for state vaccine mandates, and comply or stay shut up in your own home. No mercy. There is NO constitutional right to spread deadly disease willfully, and that is exactly what the anti-vax, anti-mask community is doing. 

Diphtheria, measles, tetanus, small pox, polio are all diseases that no longer sweep through communities leaving a wake of human destruction behind because vaccines were created and MANDATED for children for school. But we have seen what happens when crazy takes over and parents refuse to protect their kids. Measles outbreaks have been happening. My mother had measles. It destroyed her immune system. For two years, she and everyone in her 5th grade class had to be allowed to sleep two hours per day at school in order to be marginally functional. Their curriculum had to be eased up because of the neurological side effects. They were spindly, weak, and susceptible to every single virus they had previously been immune to because of what measles did to their bodies. She was happy to take us to get our MMR shots as children, grateful that we would not suffer the same. She also had mumps, and said it was the worst pain and most suffering she has ever endured, and this is a woman who was in a car accident and had her ankle internally decapitated. She knows what pain is. Mumps was worse.

So ya. I just do not have patience, sympathy, or compassion anymore for the anti-vax community. And if they keep it up, may end up with many, many restrictions in their lives. Those restrictions will not be unconstitutional because they have NO inherent right to keep spreading disease during a pandemic. The rest of society has a basic human right to seeing this horror show abate to manageable levels, to see the our healthcare system brought back from the brink of total collapse.

[TravelingChris]

1 hour ago, Quill said:

Actually, those of you concerned about civil liberties, where are you in regards to laws about smoking?

 

Its such a good point. And it’s one thing I don’t understand; as I have said already, as a society, we accept many measures that are personally inconvenient, unpleasant or annoying for the benefit of society. And I remember well the “But My Rights!!” aspect of a bunch of them. I remember people arguing against car safety seat laws because, “*I* was never in a car seat in my life and *I* survived!” And helmet laws: “If I want to take a chance of splattering my brains on Rt 70 while riding my Harley, that is my choice!” And people who resisted the law to have a fence around their pools because, “I don’t even have any non-swimming kids; why do I have to put up an ugly fence around the pool in my own yard!” 
 

Not to mention the vaccination requirements already in place all across the US. There are 100 years of legal precedent supporting the fact that governments/municipalities *can* require vaccination to defend the public health. (As in Jacobsen v. State of Massachusetts.) 

BTW, my book club was lively last night, as two members expressed these opposing views as well. 

 

This is a legal question that will probably be decided by the US Supreme Court.  That was a case where the state mandated a vaccine.  It is not at all obvious that the federal government can mandate vaccines except in very limited cases like the military.

[SlowRiver]

There are a few thousand people that die every year in the US from diphtheria.

It's a bit odd to be disagreeing about how possible it is to eliminate viruses, when we still have only eliminated two in human history, after more than 60 years of widespread vaccination for many of them. And none of them are even in the same family of viruses - the closest comparator to covid now is flu and no one thinks that is going anywhere.

How is it suddenly a real possibility now when it's been so difficult before? 

Smallpox was able to be actually eradicated because of it's particular characteristics. Easy to see, quick to become visible after infection, doesn't mutate readily, no animal equivalent, immunity is permanent and lifelong,  There are a few other diseases that scientists think it might be possible to really eradicate which share similar characteristics - a few being less than 10 . Covid is not similar to those.

Edited October 15, 2021 by SlowRiver

[Faith-manor]

2 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

There are a few thousand people that die every year in the US from diphtheria.

It's a bit odd to be disagreeing about how possible it is to eliminate viruses, when we still have only eliminated two in human history, after more than 60 years of widespread vaccination for many of them. And none of them are even in the same family of viruses - the closest comparator to covid now is flu and no one thinks that is going anywhere.

How is it suddenly a real possibility now when it's been so difficult before? 

Smallpox was able to be actually eradicated because of it's particular characteristics. Easy to see, quick to become visible after infection, doesn't mutate readily, no animal equivalent, immunity is permanent and lifelong,  There are a few other diseases that scientists think it might be possible to really eradicate which share similar characteristics - a few being less than 10 . Covid is not similar to those.

Not in the USA with mandatory DTaP for children to attend school. You are being dishonest again. The average is less than two per year. Two. In the USA. Where the vaccines are mandated and distribution is efficient, diphtheria is NOT a problem in communities.

[hshibley]

1 hour ago, SlowRiver said:

There are a few thousand people that die every year in the US from diphtheria.

It's a bit odd to be disagreeing about how possible it is to eliminate viruses, when we still have only eliminated two in human history, after more than 60 years of widespread vaccination for many of them. And none of them are even in the same family of viruses - the closest comparator to covid now is flu and no one thinks that is going anywhere.

How is it suddenly a real possibility now when it's been so difficult before? 

Smallpox was able to be actually eradicated because of it's particular characteristics. Easy to see, quick to become visible after infection, doesn't mutate readily, no animal equivalent, immunity is permanent and lifelong,  There are a few other diseases that scientists think it might be possible to really eradicate which share similar characteristics - a few being less than 10 . Covid is not similar to those.

 

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

Not in the USA with mandatory DTaP for children to attend school. You are being dishonest again. The average is less than two per year. Two. In the USA. Where the vaccines are mandated and distribution is efficient, diphtheria is NOT a problem in communities.

Faithmanor is correct it’s around 2. I don’t understand your point anyway with your false statistic.  Currently approximately 1800 people die a day from covid. If anything you’re proving SpyCar’s point mass vaccinations work. 

Edited October 15, 2021 by hshibley
Spelling

[Wheres Toto]

8 hours ago, SlowRiver said:

 

If 10 years from now we still have so many extra people dying from covid, research into better treatments may be the best course, but it may be we never find an answer.

You are really okay with deaths staying at the current level for 10 YEARS before we take further steps to mitigate?  And even then you don't think masks and vaccination should be mandated?  

I think your stance is so far off of even those people concerned about the vaccine mandates that there's barely room for discussion.    

(And I really don't see why mask mandates are a big deal.  It's already been established that similar measures are completely constitutional in a pandemic, it's non invasive, temporary, cheap, easy and effective.)

[kokotg]

17 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. 

 

My teacher husband who worked through the pandemic would like to be thanked by people getting their vaccines so he doesn't bring a breakthrough infection home to his unvaccinated 8 year old or worry when he visits my immunocompromised stepmother with stage 4 cancer. But I guess that's not as important as how a small minority of unvaccinated teachers, nurses, etc. might feel. 

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

This is a legal question that will probably be decided by the US Supreme Court.  That was a case where the state mandated a vaccine.  It is not at all obvious that the federal government can mandate vaccines except in very limited cases like the military.

I’m confused. Jacobson v. Massachusetts *was* a SCOTUS ruling in favor of the state of MA; it set legal precedent which has been used in numerous other case outcomes for a hundred years. 
 
If the distinction you’re making is specifically *federal*, then well okay; I don’t care all that much whether it’s mandated at the state or federal level. Just so long as it is mandated in more places than not. 

[kokotg]

2 minutes ago, kokotg said:

My teacher husband who worked through the pandemic would like to be thanked by people getting their vaccines so he doesn't bring a breakthrough infection home to his unvaccinated 8 year old or worry when he visits my immunocompromised stepmother with stage 4 cancer. But I guess that's not as important as how a small minority of unvaccinated teachers, nurses, etc. might feel. 

I get REALLY frustrated when people invoke "all those people who couldn't work from home during the pandemic" to support their anti-vax/anti-vax requirement stances...as if the vast majority of those people aren't like, "yes--we took on all this risk last year; now PLEASE take basic steps to protect us now that there's a vaccine." All the "hero" talk rings incredibly hollow when my husband is going to work every day with anti-mask protestors holding rallies and filing lawsuits, and it's impossible to even talk about requiring covid vaccines just like they require a whole bunch of other vaccines. 

[MercyA]

6 hours ago, BronzeTurtle said:

I tried to message you to answer but it says you can't get messages? 

Thank you! I'm so sorry, I'm terrible about keeping my inbox cleaned out. It must be full. Thanks for the answer and welcome back!

[Dmmetler]

On the pumpkin patch, unless it is actually your local government mandating masks, I don't see why it is any different than any other business requiring them. I required masks for my piano studio all last summer when we had no mask mandate because my students were under 16 and therefore could not be vaccinated at all, or were in the process of being so until about late June. There was no county mandate, but individual businesses could still choose to do so provided we posted signage to that effect. 

 

The pumpkin patches we've been to often have playhouses, bounce houses, and other amusements where children are close together. I don't see it at all unreasonable to choose to keep a mask mandate in place for that reason, because while the adults can be vaccinated and almost certainly will keep distanced from others outside their party, the kids cannot be yet, and probably won't. 

 

Similarly, we're going to the local zoo's Halloween event tonight. It will be mostly outdoors, and is spacious enough that you can stay away from other people if you so choose. Masks are still required. And it makes sense-the most vulnerable who cannot yet be vaccinated are also the most likely to want to crowd close to see the magician, or to be on the dance floor together, and rather than cancel the event, as has happened to so much in the last year, mandating masks provides extra protection for those kids. 

 

 

[Faith-manor]

17 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

You are really okay with deaths staying at the current level for 10 YEARS before we take further steps to mitigate?  And even then you don't think masks and vaccination should be mandated?  

I think your stance is so far off of even those people concerned about the vaccine mandates that there's barely room for discussion.    

(And I really don't see why mask mandates are a big deal.  It's already been established that similar measures are completely constitutional in a pandemic, it's non invasive, temporary, cheap, easy and effective.)

This. I am not sure it is even worth engaging with this person anymore. The mindset is irrational. And yes, I have met people who laughably are okay with a decade of this death and long covid rate because "the economy" except when that many people die, get long covid, leave the workforce and can't buy corporate America's sh*t anymore, the economy utterly ravaged. 

[KSera]

1 hour ago, SlowRiver said:

8 hours ago, KSera said:

What are you talking about? I haven' suggested that vaccines aren't a useful tool. And I did suggest that there are some concrete measures we could take

 I’m talking about your post I quoted listing what you thought should be done now that Covid is endemic. You did not list anything about encouraging or educating about vaccination. That’s what I’m talking about. This was your paragraph about what you thought was most important:

”Quarantining for the ill is still a good idea though how to best use testing with this requires some thought. More emphasis and maybe money spent on some cleaning and especially air circulation. Beefing up of some hospital capacities may be required, moving to a more robust procurement system. ”

Eta: And then you followed that by saying that maybe if deaths stayed as this level for ten years, then we should think about doing something else. 

Edited October 15, 2021 by KSera

[Faith-manor]

23 minutes ago, KSera said:

 I’m talking about your post I quoted listing what you thought should be done now that Covid is endemic. You did not list anything about encouraging or educating about vaccination. That’s what I’m talking about. This was your paragraph about what you thought was most important:

”Quarantining for the ill is still a good idea though how to best use testing with this requires some thought. More emphasis and maybe money spent on some cleaning and especially air circulation. Beefing up of some hospital capacities may be required, moving to a more robust procurement system. ”

Eta: And then you followed that by saying that maybe if deaths stayed as this level for ten years, then we should think about doing something else. 

Yes, that last bit was just ridiculous! So we should wait until 7,000,000 are dead and 27,000,000 or so have long covid, and the entire medical system has collapsed, and social security disability has collapsed, and the economy has sunk into a Great Depression, before considering something else? Sure. Let's start right now with priority primo in that scenario. Mass production of coffins and crematoriums, the building of large orphanages, the shuttering of schools, the construction of tens of thousands of government run soup kitchens, and bread lines. We may as well get a jump on it now than be scurrying to provide later because that is EXACTLY where the US is headed under such "reasoning". 

[TravelingChris]

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

Not in the USA with mandatory DTaP for children to attend school. You are being dishonest again. The average is less than two per year. Two. In the USA. Where the vaccines are mandated and distribution is efficient, diphtheria is NOT a problem in communities.

Thank you for this answer.  I never have even heard about any diphtheria cases and your explanation that we have about 2 a year explains why- that means we have more cases of plague, tuleremia, and a whole host of other infrequent diseases more frequently than wehave diphtheria.

[Spy Car]

2 hours ago, SlowRiver said:

What are you talking about? I haven' suggested that vaccines aren't a useful tool. And I did suggest that there are some concrete measures we could take. You and a lot of others on this thread keep assuming that people who aren't in agreement with you are anti-vaccination in general, or don't think people should get this vaccination, or that there shouldn't be measures to try and mitigate covid effects, etc. While at the same time you aren't really addressing any issues around what long term management could or should look like, around ethical issues, and seem to have a deeply unrealistic sense that if only everyone does whatever, we'll be fine.

But this idea that we can decide on some level of death that we think is ok and then we just do whatever is necessary to achieve that is crazy. What if what it takes means locking people in secure units? What if everything we are willing to do doesn't get us to that level? Are there any limits to what we think it is ok to do? The idea that we have total control here is just some kind of self-comfort bedtime story.

I'm sorry to tell you that outside of the US, there are countries, like mine, that have excellent vaccination levels, and covid has not receded in the same way that diseases lime measles or polio have. It's not the same kind of disease and it's just not directly comparable. 

There is nothing wrong with vaccine education but this idea that the main reason for people not vaccinating is lack of education is rather naive from what I can see. In the US people with the highest levels of education are as likely, maybe more likely, to be hesitant with regards to covid vaccines as those with low education. There was also a very interesting study to come out of MIT recently about the data literacy of those taking a variety of more skeptical positions on a number of public health measures, and found that understanding the information was really not the problem, in fact that group often had a less naive understanding of the scientific process than the pro-people. They concluded that more data wasn't the way forward to changing people's minds. (Unfortunately their suggestions for a way forward were a little foggy.)

A lot of the best guesses right now are that covid will be like flu, it will be a yearly thing that comes in regular waves. That doesn't mean it will only be as dangerous as the flu, even with vaccination. It may be more dangerous for a long time. It may evolve to become less serious which isn't uncommon. We may find that, like some other viruses, if people get it as children they are less likely to have serious effects as adults. Right now we don't know and a multiplicity of ideas and approaches is not necessarily a bad thing. Some skepticism and asking questions are not bad things. 

But the approach of trying to force people into vaccination isn't exactly working where you are, or anywhere else, so I'm not sure why people think it's the way forward. Germany decided against that kind of approach for just that reason, they felt it would create a public divide that would ultimately take them away from their goal. 

The ethical issue at hand in this pandemic is that you have no right to put others in harm's way, especially when there are safe and effective means to mitigate against that harm.

Your "ethics" are entirely upside down.

Bill

[TravelingChris]

As to the idea that we can't do more, can I express my utter frustration w the FDA????? A doctor from Johns Hopkins expressed veey well my frustration.  Apparently that Merck drug that is a very effective pill to stop Covid from being as serious as it can be was actually ready for use last December but FDA just yesterday said they won't decide anything about it to late November so it won't be out till Dec at least.  And that wasn't his or my only rant--  they also okayed an ineffective, very expensive Alzheimer drug this last spring.

And I know I read an article last month or maybe late August about how a few centuries ago because of cholera, plumbing and water treatment became standard.  This article went on to argue that we need to have a second health building revolution and add good ventilation systems.  We know that women, in particular, suffer a lot more from "sick building" syndrome. Much better ventilation would cure that and greatly reduce all airborne diseases like Covid, flu, colds. RsV, etc.

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

As to the idea that we can't do more, can I express my utter frustration w the FDA?????

Agree with this. I want safety, but the FDA moves so slow and it seems that it’s often the bureaucracy of it and not safety reasons that are holding it up. So many examples with this pandemic. Mixing and matching of shots for one, home tests for another. Surely we can follow the science and make sure things are safe while also not getting totally bogged down in procedure when the stakes are so high? 

[kokotg]

36 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

Thank you for this answer.  I never have even heard about any diphtheria cases and your explanation that we have about 2 a year explains why- that means we have more cases of plague, tuleremia, and a whole host of other infrequent diseases more frequently than wehave diphtheria.

Yeah, I just looked; there are about 2000 deaths a year worldwide (down from 8000/year in 1990); it's virtually unknown in developed countries with high vaccination rates.

[Dmmetler]

33 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

As to the idea that we can't do more, can I express my utter frustration w the FDA????? A doctor from Johns Hopkins expressed veey well my frustration.  Apparently that Merck drug that is a very effective pill to stop Covid from being as serious as it can be was actually ready for use last December but FDA just yesterday said they won't decide anything about it to late November so it won't be out till Dec at least.  And that wasn't his or my only rant--  they also okayed an ineffective, very expensive Alzheimer drug this last spring.

And I know I read an article last month or maybe late August about how a few centuries ago because of cholera, plumbing and water treatment became standard.  This article went on to argue that we need to have a second health building revolution and add good ventilation systems.  We know that women, in particular, suffer a lot more from "sick building" syndrome. Much better ventilation would cure that and greatly reduce all airborne diseases like Covid, flu, colds. RsV, etc.

On the latter, I have been amazed about how much better I feel now that I am running air purifiers in my studio and classrooms. I used to get headaches after a couple of hours. Now I don't. It's not masking, because I don't mask when I'm in the studio alone, but I do run the air purifiers, and I don't get headaches whether or not I'm masked. I had a student comment that "I was feeling kind of stuffy before I got here, but now I feel fine"-and I told her that it's because of our air purifiers. Not only do they help with germs, but with pollens, mold, etc. 

[Indigo Blue]

16 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

On the latter, I have been amazed about how much better I feel now that I am running air purifiers in my studio and classrooms. I used to get headaches after a couple of hours. Now I don't. It's not masking, because I don't mask when I'm in the studio alone, but I do run the air purifiers, and I don't get headaches whether or not I'm masked. I had a student comment that "I was feeling kind of stuffy before I got here, but now I feel fine"-and I told her that it's because of our air purifiers. Not only do they help with germs, but with pollens, mold, etc. 

My ds uses one for his cat. He says it helps so much. He says he has also noticed a big difference in his own allergies, too.

[prairiewindmomma]

Yup. We have run air purifiers for years and years due to allergies. I really love the newer models like the Levoit which are small enough to pack in a suitcase. I may actually start traveling with one once I start traveling again. 
 

Fwiw, we run the AirNow IQ monitor in our house and we discovered our house builds up CO2 throughout the day—we have been opening windows more and that helps. The air purifier doesn’t resolve that.

[fraidycat]

21 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

On the latter, I have been amazed about how much better I feel now that I am running air purifiers in my studio and classrooms. I used to get headaches after a couple of hours. Now I don't. It's not masking, because I don't mask when I'm in the studio alone, but I do run the air purifiers, and I don't get headaches whether or not I'm masked. I had a student comment that "I was feeling kind of stuffy before I got here, but now I feel fine"-and I told her that it's because of our air purifiers. Not only do they help with germs, but with pollens, mold, etc. 

Oh, interesting. My DH's headaches have reduced significantly since he started using CPAP, down approx. 1-2 days/month vs. 2-3days/week, but maybe some air purifiers would help with the rest.

Which ones do you use and recommend?

[Dmmetler]

I have Levoit ones in the studio, which are fairly small. Each can cycle the air in my smaller studio fully in well under 15 minutes on the middle setting-the two together can easily cycle my larger classroom as well. I have a Samsung at home, which also works well, but is much larger and less portable. I got one for my college kid's dorm (and since mold has proven to be an issue, we also got a dehumidifier shipped which also contains an air purifier, so that dorm room should be quite well filtered!)

 

[Bootsie]

1 hour ago, TravelingChris said:

As to the idea that we can't do more, can I express my utter frustration w the FDA????? A doctor from Johns Hopkins expressed veey well my frustration.  Apparently that Merck drug that is a very effective pill to stop Covid from being as serious as it can be was actually ready for use last December but FDA just yesterday said they won't decide anything about it to late November so it won't be out till Dec at least.  And that wasn't his or my only rant--  they also okayed an ineffective, very expensive Alzheimer drug this last spring.

And I know I read an article last month or maybe late August about how a few centuries ago because of cholera, plumbing and water treatment became standard.  This article went on to argue that we need to have a second health building revolution and add good ventilation systems.  We know that women, in particular, suffer a lot more from "sick building" syndrome. Much better ventilation would cure that and greatly reduce all airborne diseases like Covid, flu, colds. RsV, etc.

It was my impression that Merck did not file its application with the FDA until earlier this week.  Is that not the case?  I know that it would be great for things to move faster, but I don't see how the FDA could have moved faster if it did not have the application upon which to move.

[SeaConquest]

11 hours ago, Bootsie said:

But, when I ask to be educated if that is really the case, your response is about how many people have died, your personal situation, the party affilation of your family members. and avoided the claim that you made.  

I am vaccinated, so you do not need to educate me about the benefits of a vaccine.  At this point, I see no evidence that it is reasonable to assume that every person I come in contact with is a loaded gun.  I think I would have a difficult time ineteracting in the world and with other humans if that was my underlying assumption.  I also know people who are vaccine hesitant that become more hesitant when they hear these types of claims being made (and told that if they deny that they haven't learned anything).  Therefore, I will choose to speak with them differently, hoping to do more good than harm.  

What part of this was avoiding the claim:

"So, yes, if you have no way to know whether you are infectious or not, because you can be asymptomatic, and rapid home tests are still not readily available in this country, then when you are a nurse, you have a duty to your patients, who are relying on you for their safety, to err on the side of caution and assume that you are walking around with a loaded weapon. Therefore, IMO you *must* take the necessary precautions (masking + vaccinating) because, to do otherwise, and err on the side of assuming that you are healthy until proven otherwise, is to put your patients at risk because we know how Covid spreads silently and asymptomatically. And this choice, as I have said repeatedly, is a breach of your ethical duties as a nurse and grounds for termination by your employer."

I answered your question directly and I stated the evidentiary basis for my claim. That you fail to grasp that is not my issue.

And, I didn't ask you to assume that every person that you "come in contact with is a loaded gun," did I? You are making huge assumptions from very my specific claims, which is why I continue to point out your false equivalences. I said, "..."when you are a nurse, you have a duty to your patients, who are relying on you for their safety, to err on the side of caution..." Are you a nurse? If you aren't then I am not speaking to you because I have already stated numerous times that no duty = no breach. 

I speak to vaccine hesitant patients all of the time. My role is to educate people about the benefits and risks of vaccines. That's it. I do not guilt people. I do not pressure patients. I believe in informed consent and bodily autonomy. I also believe in personal responsibility for one's choices, and that if you choose to live in a collective society (versus self-sufficiently), we have certain duties and responsibilities, depending on the roles that we choose to take on in that society.

For example, I chose to serve in our all-volunteer force as a member of the military. Therefore, I lost the right to be a conscientious objector. If I didn't like the prospect of potentially killing people, I didn't have to volunteer to serve in the Army. Likewise, if you choose to become a nurse, then you know going in that you lose the right to opt out of vaccinating against deadly diseases because we know from nursing school that vaccination supports public health. This isn't some surprising concept that is being sprung on people out of nowhere. Like I said, it's literally nursing school 101.

So please cut it with the false equivalences. You're not fooling anyone here with these games.  

 

Edited October 15, 2021 by SeaConquest

[TravelingChris]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

Agree with this. I want safety, but the FDA moves so slow and it seems that it’s often the bureaucracy of it and not safety reasons that are holding it up. So many examples with this pandemic. Mixing and matching of shots for one, home tests for another. Surely we can follow the science and make sure things are safe while also not getting totally bogged down in procedure when the stakes are so high? 

My eyes were really opened when I listened to the hearings for the Pfizer third shot for immunocompromised hearings in August.   Most of the doctors calling in wanted things like a second other shot for J and J,  wider allowances for immunocompromised, etc.  The way the govt officials were talking was like they want perfection.  It seemed that because they never see patients, they had a very unrealistic view if the world.

[TravelingChris]

16 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

It was my impression that Merck did not file its application with the FDA until earlier this week.  Is that not the case?  I know that it would be great for things to move faster, but I don't see how the FDA could have moved faster if it did not have the application upon which to move.

Yes that is right but it is because of buruecratic paperwork rules that they didn't file earlier. And since they filed last week and this can save lives, why not discuss it next week, and not wait till end of November ?