Do you know the difference between 1 in a thousand and 1 in 10 million? Honestly, you act as if no one involved in this process has given any of this any thought. That doesn't even get into the issue of the well being of the people around you. Face it. You decided to accept the small but not trivial risk of suffering serious illness from COVID so you could avoid the truly miniscule risk the vaccine posses because you feel a certain way, not because it is objectively reasonable.
He votes for Democrats and their authoritarian policies that have ruined his home state of New York, he thinks Republicans are crazy, and now he wants to move to a red state to get away from everything he's supported FOR YEARS, including that dictator DeBlasio.
I bet Ricky Gomez doesn't even understand the definition of irony. And yet, I also bet he'll move to his red state and keep voting for authoritarian Democrat nonsense like all the people who moved to my home state, not understanding at all the correlation between how he votes and where he lives going to shit.
12 hours after getting the second Moderna shot, I found myself on the floor of my bathroom, unable to move or even to cry out. If I had been home alone that day, I would have died. Thank God my dear husband, "had a feeling" and came to check on me.
I went through hell, and although I am fine -- now -- I will never risk a booster.
I had heard stories about major side effects before this happened to me. I did not want to take the vax and put it off as long as I could. My sister-in-law was one of the people who encouraged me to submit. Yesterday, she called to say she had just been released from the hospital. She had no reaction to either of the first two Pfizer shots, but the booster sent her to the emergency room, vomiting uncontrollably and unable to move.
Something is wrong here and no one in power will address concerns honestly.
This article has brought out a cadre of people who wish to not get vaccinated. Unfortunately, the posts are chock full of inaccurate claims and conspiracies. The vaccines do significantly protect against serious disease and death. Vaccines do reduce the spread of disease. Proper masks do reduce the spread of infection at indoor functions. The risks from infection far outweigh any risks that might be associated with the immunizations. To borrow a quote from some of the other posts, "End of story."
Healthcare providers and other essential workers who bravely continued to work while testing and PPE's were in short supply and when the vaccines were not available deserve our gratitude for their courage. That being said, past heroism doesn't give you a a right to endanger others in the future. While an individual has the right to refuse a treatment, society has a right to protect itself from the consequences of that refusal.
There are two types of vaccines, attenuated or mRNA. One has been around for over a hundred years; the other is more recent. Millions of people have been vaccinated by both, neither change a person's DNA, nor affect a person's reproductive ability, in fact, there is no evidence of any long-term effects from either, but if you do catch Covid 19, you enter the lottery of long-term health problems, such as organ damage, blood clots and blood vessel problems, with the side benefits of mood and fatigue. COVID-19 symptoms can sometimes persist for months. The virus can damage the lungs, heart, and brain, which increases the risk of long-term health problems. There are all kinds of imaginary issues with the vaccine, but there are real problems with catching the disease, as to those who don't want to take the vaccine, because there being told what to do, now that's a real adult response, isn't it
An article from The Lancet regarding vaccinated infection, dated 11-29-2021, titled “ The epidemiological relevance of the COVID-19-vaccinated population is increasing.”
“ In Germany, the rate of symptomatic COVID-19 cases among the fully vaccinated (“breakthrough infections”) is reported weekly since 21. July 2021 and was 16.9% at that time among patients of 60 years and older [[2]]. This proportion is increasing week by week and was 58.9% on 27. October 2021 (Figure 1) providing clear evidence of the increasing relevance of the fully vaccinated as a possible source of transmission. A similar situation was described for the UK. Between week 39 and 42, a total of 100.160 COVID-19 cases were reported among citizens of 60 years or older. 89.821 occurred among the fully vaccinated (89.7%), 3.395 among the unvaccinated (3.4%) [[3]].”
“ Many decisionmakers assume that the vaccinated can be excluded as a source of transmission. It appears to be grossly negligent to ignore the vaccinated population as a possible and relevant source of transmission when deciding about public health control measures.”
This was an interesting perspective. I think vaccine mandates for public-facing people (e.g. police, fire, healthcare) make sense, however, recently there has been significant pre-print evidence (Israeli study and Andeweg study) showing that natural infection does provide better and likely longer protection than 2 doses of the vaccine. It's pretty clear that evidence of natural SARS-CoV2 infection should be an exception.
I don't think we should use natural infection as a conscious strategy, because there are real risks of long-term impacts and death with natural infection. In addition to risk to self, the transmission chain may result in someone else down the chain dying or having long COVID symptoms. Based on the evidence we have today, the people who have had the infection should not be coerced into being vaccinated.
This article and the previous article was sent to my junk folder! Is anyone else having this issue? This has not occurred with any other articles ( I have a yahoo email)
Sorry to hear, Suzy. As your article mentions, it's sad this has become politicized, especially when so little about this virus is fully understood. There is a lot of data out there, though many reporters seem unable to find it. One point is that the infection fatality rate for COVID is .27, and that is across ALL age groups. You can check this here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33716331/ . Remember that the annual flu IFR generally ranges in the .10-.15 range. Much more than flu, SARS 2 COVID attacks the elderly and those with underlying health conditions. Healthy younger people are more at risk from the flu, according to the Government's own data. What's equally interesting is that there is no Randomized Clinical Trial that shows efficacy for mask use in isolation (most include distancing and handwashing, and that combination seems to yield positive results). Probably the only good one was the DanMask study in Denmark, which basically said mask use or not is a jump ball. You can read about those studies here: https://www.city-journal.org/do-masks-work-a-review-of-the-evidence. Last thought: the CDC estimates that 92% of Americans have been exposed to the virus and/or had vaccinations.... yet, no herd immunity seems to be developing. My takeaway is that, while I am happy to be vaccinated, we will have to learn to live with this virus, and the Country is not helped by trying to coerce everyone into lemming-like behaviors.
Sentences like "All this despite the fact that 96 percent of doctors, who know a thing or two about science, had been fully vaccinated by June." (and a few others) does not reflect the unbiased, non-editorialized and openly inquisitive caliber of journalism that I come here for. Furthermore, while I realize it's a direct quote, perhaps including someone's hyperbolic and polarizing characterization of "psycho Republicans" is probably not helpful. Finally, for all the "follow the science" rhetoric that is implied here, this article is very thin on presenting any actual science from either side of the argument.
While I appreciate the real-time dose of reality that these people are receiving (red pilling?), far too much of this article plays on the language of the Left: "Ricky said that he and Alex are thinking about moving to a state more friendly to anti-vaxxers," and "psycho Republicans." This is in the same vein as "climate deniers" which abusively creates a moral equivalent between Holocaust deniers and people who are skeptical about climate change. Calling someone not "vaccinated" for COVID who is otherwise fully vaccinated against MMR, Polio, etc. an "anti-vaxxer" is just purely abusive and, frankly, I have higher expectations from Bari.
BTW: Bari, Nellie, Suzy... it's a family affair, maybe?
My first—not very charitable—reaction as I started on this piece was, "Now you know how Vietnam veterans felt." One second thought, though, I chided myself for such a display of insensitivity. But then I came to Fracisco Gomez, he who is so distressed over being mistaken for a "psychotic Republican"—and I failed to feel his pain. Mr. Gomez laments that "It grinds my gears that health is being politicized"—while doing precisely that himself. Later for you, pal.
On vaccine mandates, I'm of two minds. As a retired soldier I've been paying particular attention to the military vaccine mandate, which has encountered some resistance in the ranks. When soldiers receive an order, they're supposed to salute and carry it out. Period. Full stop. On the other hand I'm a polio survivor (who through the grace of God made a full recovery). The Sauk vaccine came in just a little too late to save me nearly three years of pain and partial paralysis between the ages of six and eight. So I have a hard time thinking well of anti-vaxxers or maintaining my objectivity on the issue.
Setting all that aside as best I can, my conclusion is that while everybody (medical issues aside) should get vaccinated against COVID, vaccine mandates are counterproductive and do more harm than good.
If you let your government do whatever it wants during an "emergency", everything will become an emergency. On a related note, if you let your politicians cheat to get elected, you can't vote them out. Pass it on.
Why are they choosing to lose their jobs? Because they know the true risks and benefits of the virus.
Do you know the difference between 1 in a thousand and 1 in 10 million? Honestly, you act as if no one involved in this process has given any of this any thought. That doesn't even get into the issue of the well being of the people around you. Face it. You decided to accept the small but not trivial risk of suffering serious illness from COVID so you could avoid the truly miniscule risk the vaccine posses because you feel a certain way, not because it is objectively reasonable.
There are also real people being hurt by the vaccine. There is no honesty or transparency regarding this.
Wow, Ricky Gomez is such a hypocrite.
He votes for Democrats and their authoritarian policies that have ruined his home state of New York, he thinks Republicans are crazy, and now he wants to move to a red state to get away from everything he's supported FOR YEARS, including that dictator DeBlasio.
I bet Ricky Gomez doesn't even understand the definition of irony. And yet, I also bet he'll move to his red state and keep voting for authoritarian Democrat nonsense like all the people who moved to my home state, not understanding at all the correlation between how he votes and where he lives going to shit.
12 hours after getting the second Moderna shot, I found myself on the floor of my bathroom, unable to move or even to cry out. If I had been home alone that day, I would have died. Thank God my dear husband, "had a feeling" and came to check on me.
I went through hell, and although I am fine -- now -- I will never risk a booster.
I had heard stories about major side effects before this happened to me. I did not want to take the vax and put it off as long as I could. My sister-in-law was one of the people who encouraged me to submit. Yesterday, she called to say she had just been released from the hospital. She had no reaction to either of the first two Pfizer shots, but the booster sent her to the emergency room, vomiting uncontrollably and unable to move.
Something is wrong here and no one in power will address concerns honestly.
This article has brought out a cadre of people who wish to not get vaccinated. Unfortunately, the posts are chock full of inaccurate claims and conspiracies. The vaccines do significantly protect against serious disease and death. Vaccines do reduce the spread of disease. Proper masks do reduce the spread of infection at indoor functions. The risks from infection far outweigh any risks that might be associated with the immunizations. To borrow a quote from some of the other posts, "End of story."
Healthcare providers and other essential workers who bravely continued to work while testing and PPE's were in short supply and when the vaccines were not available deserve our gratitude for their courage. That being said, past heroism doesn't give you a a right to endanger others in the future. While an individual has the right to refuse a treatment, society has a right to protect itself from the consequences of that refusal.
There are two types of vaccines, attenuated or mRNA. One has been around for over a hundred years; the other is more recent. Millions of people have been vaccinated by both, neither change a person's DNA, nor affect a person's reproductive ability, in fact, there is no evidence of any long-term effects from either, but if you do catch Covid 19, you enter the lottery of long-term health problems, such as organ damage, blood clots and blood vessel problems, with the side benefits of mood and fatigue. COVID-19 symptoms can sometimes persist for months. The virus can damage the lungs, heart, and brain, which increases the risk of long-term health problems. There are all kinds of imaginary issues with the vaccine, but there are real problems with catching the disease, as to those who don't want to take the vaccine, because there being told what to do, now that's a real adult response, isn't it
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-long-term-effects/art-20490351
Anti-vax and a frontline worker. Time to get a new career and stop whining.
An article from The Lancet regarding vaccinated infection, dated 11-29-2021, titled “ The epidemiological relevance of the COVID-19-vaccinated population is increasing.”
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00258-1/fulltext?s=08#%20
“ In Germany, the rate of symptomatic COVID-19 cases among the fully vaccinated (“breakthrough infections”) is reported weekly since 21. July 2021 and was 16.9% at that time among patients of 60 years and older [[2]]. This proportion is increasing week by week and was 58.9% on 27. October 2021 (Figure 1) providing clear evidence of the increasing relevance of the fully vaccinated as a possible source of transmission. A similar situation was described for the UK. Between week 39 and 42, a total of 100.160 COVID-19 cases were reported among citizens of 60 years or older. 89.821 occurred among the fully vaccinated (89.7%), 3.395 among the unvaccinated (3.4%) [[3]].”
“ Many decisionmakers assume that the vaccinated can be excluded as a source of transmission. It appears to be grossly negligent to ignore the vaccinated population as a possible and relevant source of transmission when deciding about public health control measures.”
This was an interesting perspective. I think vaccine mandates for public-facing people (e.g. police, fire, healthcare) make sense, however, recently there has been significant pre-print evidence (Israeli study and Andeweg study) showing that natural infection does provide better and likely longer protection than 2 doses of the vaccine. It's pretty clear that evidence of natural SARS-CoV2 infection should be an exception.
I don't think we should use natural infection as a conscious strategy, because there are real risks of long-term impacts and death with natural infection. In addition to risk to self, the transmission chain may result in someone else down the chain dying or having long COVID symptoms. Based on the evidence we have today, the people who have had the infection should not be coerced into being vaccinated.
This article and the previous article was sent to my junk folder! Is anyone else having this issue? This has not occurred with any other articles ( I have a yahoo email)
Sorry to hear, Suzy. As your article mentions, it's sad this has become politicized, especially when so little about this virus is fully understood. There is a lot of data out there, though many reporters seem unable to find it. One point is that the infection fatality rate for COVID is .27, and that is across ALL age groups. You can check this here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33716331/ . Remember that the annual flu IFR generally ranges in the .10-.15 range. Much more than flu, SARS 2 COVID attacks the elderly and those with underlying health conditions. Healthy younger people are more at risk from the flu, according to the Government's own data. What's equally interesting is that there is no Randomized Clinical Trial that shows efficacy for mask use in isolation (most include distancing and handwashing, and that combination seems to yield positive results). Probably the only good one was the DanMask study in Denmark, which basically said mask use or not is a jump ball. You can read about those studies here: https://www.city-journal.org/do-masks-work-a-review-of-the-evidence. Last thought: the CDC estimates that 92% of Americans have been exposed to the virus and/or had vaccinations.... yet, no herd immunity seems to be developing. My takeaway is that, while I am happy to be vaccinated, we will have to learn to live with this virus, and the Country is not helped by trying to coerce everyone into lemming-like behaviors.
Sentences like "All this despite the fact that 96 percent of doctors, who know a thing or two about science, had been fully vaccinated by June." (and a few others) does not reflect the unbiased, non-editorialized and openly inquisitive caliber of journalism that I come here for. Furthermore, while I realize it's a direct quote, perhaps including someone's hyperbolic and polarizing characterization of "psycho Republicans" is probably not helpful. Finally, for all the "follow the science" rhetoric that is implied here, this article is very thin on presenting any actual science from either side of the argument.
While I appreciate the real-time dose of reality that these people are receiving (red pilling?), far too much of this article plays on the language of the Left: "Ricky said that he and Alex are thinking about moving to a state more friendly to anti-vaxxers," and "psycho Republicans." This is in the same vein as "climate deniers" which abusively creates a moral equivalent between Holocaust deniers and people who are skeptical about climate change. Calling someone not "vaccinated" for COVID who is otherwise fully vaccinated against MMR, Polio, etc. an "anti-vaxxer" is just purely abusive and, frankly, I have higher expectations from Bari.
BTW: Bari, Nellie, Suzy... it's a family affair, maybe?
My first—not very charitable—reaction as I started on this piece was, "Now you know how Vietnam veterans felt." One second thought, though, I chided myself for such a display of insensitivity. But then I came to Fracisco Gomez, he who is so distressed over being mistaken for a "psychotic Republican"—and I failed to feel his pain. Mr. Gomez laments that "It grinds my gears that health is being politicized"—while doing precisely that himself. Later for you, pal.
On vaccine mandates, I'm of two minds. As a retired soldier I've been paying particular attention to the military vaccine mandate, which has encountered some resistance in the ranks. When soldiers receive an order, they're supposed to salute and carry it out. Period. Full stop. On the other hand I'm a polio survivor (who through the grace of God made a full recovery). The Sauk vaccine came in just a little too late to save me nearly three years of pain and partial paralysis between the ages of six and eight. So I have a hard time thinking well of anti-vaxxers or maintaining my objectivity on the issue.
Setting all that aside as best I can, my conclusion is that while everybody (medical issues aside) should get vaccinated against COVID, vaccine mandates are counterproductive and do more harm than good.
If you let your government do whatever it wants during an "emergency", everything will become an emergency. On a related note, if you let your politicians cheat to get elected, you can't vote them out. Pass it on.