If you're vaccinated, you're no longer protected from getting infected, but you most likely won't get seriously ill with COVID -- but you can still transmit the virus, so continue to wear a mask -- not just to protect yourself, but also to protect others.


If you are still unvaccinated, you are not just risking your own life, but the lives of those around you.


https://roanoke.com/news/state-and-regional/in-videos-hospitalized-virginia-man-urges-people-to-get-covid-vaccine/article_9571fe4a-84da-5980-8888-b0b2c330755c.html


https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/coronavirus-pandemic-vaccine-updates-08-05-21/h_d2accec79fdc37f422d02c536828ea1e

Covid-19 vaccines no longer prevent transmission, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said Thursday.

“Our vaccines are working exceptionally well,” Walensky told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “They continue to work well for Delta, with regard to severe illness and death – they prevent it. But what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission.”
That is why the CDC is recommending even vaccinated people wear masks indoors again, Walensky said.

“If you're going home to somebody who has not been vaccinated, to somebody who can't get vaccinated, somebody who might be immunosuppressed or a little bit frail, somebody who has comorbidities that put them at high risk, I would suggest you wear a mask in public indoor settings.”



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/05/2021 07:46PM by anybody.

Yeah, I read about that earlier today. Now we are back to trusting fellow citizens to do what is right not just for themselves but for anyone.

The outlook could not be more dire.

The big party was cancelled/scaled way down due to Delta, you idiot.

If you'd bothered to check, you could have found out on your own.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/barack-obama-birthday-party-cancel-marthas-vineyard-1207243/

Here's a CBC article (from July 17) that explains vaccination and transmission quite well.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-vaccines-herd-immunity-variants-1.6104364+


The concepts can be confusing for lay people, especially as it's a bouncing ball - details and recommendations can change according to regular ongoing new information, and from country to country. But the bottom lines are easy enough to comprehend, you'd think.


Excerpts:

"Most vaccines are working very efficiently to prevent onward transmission from the vaccinated infected person to a non-vaccinated person..."

"But with so many unvaccinated people around the world, and because of the transmissibility of variants such as delta, this virus keeps on spreading..."

"The whole concept behind herd immunity is to provide that protection in the unvaccinated people by having enough vaccinated people around them..."

"But I think we can't be complacent, because that kind of herd immunity really requires large numbers of people to be vaccinated within a given population. And many places have not achieved that yet."

"If there's a significant proportion of people who are not vaccinated ... those are going to be the people primarily driving transmission, those are going to be the majority of the cases, those are going to be the vast, vast majority of the hospitalizations and deaths..."

-----

I acknowledge that things change - I find it's useful to get daily updates on the latest findings and recommendations.

This article is a couple of weeks old so it's always best to go with the most recent findings. But I think it explains well some of the basic concepts.

One study says vaccinated people may not be as infectious as unvaccinated people

https://www.sfgate.com/coronavirus/article/breakthrough-COVID-delta-spread-infectious-study-16358569.php

"A study from Singapore published on preprint site medRxiv further explores the viral load question, and found that while vaccinated individuals who become infected do have virus in their noses, they shed virus considerably faster than infected unvaccinated individuals — making the former group less infectious."

The cited study:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261295v1.full.pdf

TL;DR version:
This is a nuanced finding, and people, both vaxxers and anti-vaxxers, do not do nuance very well. Not great news, but vaccines are still very effective at preventing serious illness or death, which is their most important feature.


I was going to jump on the posters for misleading reporting of the story, but then I saw that Wolf Blitzer had reported the story the same way.

Then I just saw the CDC director on TV. She was answering a related question about how breakthrough infections are followed, and she was the one who was misleading. She was going on about how cohort studies would give researchers both the numerator and denominator. I knew what she was talking about, but I imagine the vast majority of listeners had a glassy stare, and no idea about numerator or denominator of what. She was talking statistician shorthand.

Not that I am all that good at getting to the point myself, but for the CDC, that should be a major job requirement.


As I understand it, here is what has changed in our knowledge, and what has not changed.

Breakthrough infections in vaccinated people are still rare, so it is not like the vaccines have changed somehow and "stopped working".

HERE's WHAT's NEW: if you do get a breakthrough infection of Delta, you are likely to be infectious, that is, you can pass the infection to others.

Again, nothing has changed with the vaccine. It probably never was effective with stopping infectiousness of people who caught the Delta version. We just didn't know.


You are still less likely to get a breakthrough infection if you are vaccinated.

You are still much less likely to show serious symptoms if you get a breakthrough infection.

People around you who are vaccinated are less likely to catch Delta from you if they are vaccinated. These are all still excellent reasons to get vaccinated.

Here is the new thing to be cautious about: if you do get a breakthrough infection (and note that you may not even know because you may be asymptomatic) you are probably infectious, even if asymptomatic. Thus you may pose a danger of infecting unvaccinated people.

You also pose a slight danger to vaccinated people. If you are infectious, it is much less likely that you will infect them, but not extremely unlikely. It is still extremely unlikely that they will get seriously ill or die.


What I take away from all this: vaccinated people still need to be cautious around unvaccinated people.

Herd immunity is going to be more difficult to establish. It will probably require very high percentages of of the population being vaccinated. I would guess 90% plus, similar to measles.


Here's the good news. For reasons we are not entirely sure about, the Delta variation caseload in India and the UK did eventually decline substantially. I think it is reasonable to hope that the same thing will happen in the US. In the meantime, either we need to be more cautious, or expect a resurgence. "More cautious" has not been our strong suit.

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What I take away from all this: vaccinated people
> still need to be cautious around unvaccinated
> people.

What I take away from it is that we all have to mask up again, possibly for a long time.

+1.0x10^9

Or just avoid certain situations. I agree that yes, we will need to mask up. I am not particularly enthusiastic, though I will. I expect there will be a great many people who will simply refuse.

Sucks to be a flight attendant.

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------
> Sucks to be a flight attendant.
===============================

Have company adopt as SOP
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XFoXmnBuLw0

what a terrible situation. Flight attendants are asked to function as police, and it is only a matter of time before people get hurt and another matter of time till some flight attendant oversteps his bounds and is charged with a crime.

The government must get a hold of this. You can't ask civilian employees--flight attendants, teachers, cashiers--to enforce the law.

Doesn't help allay my flight hesitancy.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> what a terrible situation. Flight attendants are
> asked to function as police, and it is only a
> matter of time before people get hurt and another
> matter of time till some flight attendant
> oversteps his bounds and is charged with a crime.
>
> The government must get a hold of this. You can't
> ask civilian employees--flight attendants,
> teachers, cashiers--to enforce the law.

I think you are right. But what about international flights? If you fly from the UK to the US, which law enforcement agency has legal authority after 100 miles or so from take-off? When you're over international waters, you can take off your mask and there is no law there to be broken. So in that case, wouldn't enforcement fall back to the airline and thus, to the flight attendants? Maybe the airline could just blacklist any passenger who does not comply. There are a limited number of airlines in the world. It wouldn't take long until a person could lose the ability to fly on any airline anywhere.

https://simpleflying.com/iata-disruptive-passenger-powers/

"Now, thanks to the MP14 treaty being ratified by the required number of states, any country will have the jurisdiction to prosecute troublemaking passengers when the aircraft lands on their soil."

"Now, passengers who break the rules of travel or generally disrupt the flight face the prospect of being tried not in their home state, but in whichever state the aircraft touches down. In the case of a flight having to make a diversion due to passenger disruption, this really could be anywhere."

So far the police have done very little about unruly passengers. Let's hope that changes.

The U.K. is 90% vaccinated at this point (90% partially, 70% fully.) If Delta is in decline there, that's probably why.

That doesn't explain India's drop. Plus when the Alpha variant started spreading like wildfire around Chicago, epidemiologists expected it to go national, but it spread a few hundred miles, and stopped for no known reason.

There is still much we do not know about this virus.

It all has to do with 5-G cell phone service!!!

Obviously (if you know me) I made that up. But if this doesn't
already exist as some part of the overall prevailing/competing conspiracy theories, this post could start it!!

That conspiracy has been going around for over a year

https://www.bbc.com/news/53191523

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Breakthrough infections in vaccinated people are
> still rare, so it is not like the vaccines have
> changed somehow and "stopped working".

Good point. I hear and read of people coming to the conclusion that it's a sign that vaccinations don't work, when it's actually the opposite - they are preventing the vast majority of vaccinated people from serious illness even if they contract the virus.


> HERE's WHAT's NEW: if you do get a breakthrough
> infection of Delta, you are likely to be
> infectious, that is, you can pass the infection to
> others.

I've been hearing this for weeks, it seems like, so it wasn't news to me today. (But time is dragging in this age of COVID so maybe it's just been a few days?)

This is why (at least here in B.C.) masks are still "strongly recommended" in many indoor spaces and especially if they're crowded (although crowds are discouraged). Certainly, unvaccinated people are encouraged to always wear masks in public spaces. Although all too often many who don't want a vaccine don't want to observe the other precautions either. Many businesses, fortunately, still post signs asking people to mask up and some even still require it before entry. Nearly 100% of businesses, so far, are requiring their staff to wear masks which I really appreciate.


> You are still less likely to get a breakthrough
> infection if you are vaccinated.

> You are still much less likely to show serious
> symptoms if you get a breakthrough infection.

Yes and yes.


> Here is the new thing to be cautious about: if you
> do get a breakthrough infection (and note that you
> may not even know because you may be asymptomatic)
> you are probably infectious, even if asymptomatic.
> Thus you may pose a danger of infecting
> unvaccinated people.

> You also pose a slight danger to vaccinated
> people. If you are infectious, it is much less
> likely that you will infect them, but not
> extremely unlikely. It is still extremely unlikely
> that they will get seriously ill or die.

I've read here in the recent past a couple of posters (maybe not regulars or honest?) who said that the recent finding that vaccinated people can have "full viral loads" in their noses (the reason why they're contagious) means the vaccine isn't working.

It's actually the exact opposite. They have virus in their noses but they aren't sick. In fact, many are asymptomatic. This is a strong indication that the vaccine they received is indeed doing its job.

This reality, though, is a major reason why even vaccinated people should think about when it's appropriate for them to still mask up. They can still pose a risk to others, whether family or strangers.


> What I take away from all this: vaccinated people
> still need to be cautious around unvaccinated
> people.

That's why I'm happy that a lot of the mandates here are still in place or are being slowly and cautiously relaxed. We are still not at herd immunity by the numbers.


> Herd immunity is going to be more difficult to
> establish. It will probably require very high
> percentages of of the population being vaccinated.
> I would guess 90% plus, similar to measles.

That's what I've heard. Tall order, given the hesitancy or refusal of some to rush out and get a vaccine.


> Here's the good news. For reasons we are not
> entirely sure about, the Delta variation caseload
> in India and the UK did eventually decline
> substantially. I think it is reasonable to hope
> that the same thing will happen in the US. In the
> meantime, either we need to be more cautious, or
> expect a resurgence. "More cautious" has not been
> our strong suit.

Yeah, too bad. We have pockets like that here and also some prominent people debating the information, mandates, recommendations and guidance from health officials.

I always ask myself what their qualifications are to do so. It's absolutely OK to ask questions and to choose one's own course but not to debate or argue out of ignorance nor to endanger others.

It does make me sad to read of people in ICU dying of COVID who say "I wish...". Sometimes we just don't get a second chance.

I wish those with the loudest megaphones weren't all too often the ones with the least applicable information inside their heads. And the most lack of concern for their fellow humans.

So if vaccinated people don’t wear masks they might cause the expiration of the former guy’s supporters?

My Mom and I are both fully vaccinated, but we haven't changed a thing. We still only go out to shop once every week or two. We try to order food on-line. You still can't go anywhere in public, indoors, without having a mask on here.

I'm just trying to survive this thing. I didn't really like the vaccine, and I got sick for several days, but I'm way more scared of the virus than I am of the vaccine.

A 3-day fever is much better than landing in the hospital.

"For many, the belated realization that Covid will be ‘a long war’ sparks anger and denial

Still, Americans seem shocked by the recent turn of events. Last week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advised everyone — even those who’ve gotten Covid-19 shots — to go back to indoor masking, a decision driven by new data showing the hyper-contagious Delta variant colonizes the nose and throat of some vaccinated people just as well as the unvaccinated, meaning they may just as easily spread this new version of the virus, while stilling being protected against the worst manifestations of the disease."

Delta is now 100% of new Covid cases in Maryland. This happened even more quickly than we were expecting. It pushed out every other strain, including Gamma, which had also been growing.

. . . being vaccinated does not prevent an amphibious landing, it just means you have an army to push them back into the sea.
No vaccination no army.

Oh, and while alpha is a standard infantry invasion, delta is mechanized forces

I'm ready.

In light of your past comments on the subject I felt fairly sure that once you recovered from your bout with COVID-19 you would still not change your mind about the vaccine or enlarge your information sources. Seems I was right.

I saw your post, now zapped, and hope you don't use that to conclude that RfM is biased against you or that you aren't allowed to present your opinion. But as soon as you use buzz-phrases that signify a particular political view your post will likely not survive. In your case you repeat the term "fear porn". Right there I know your information is not going to be balanced.

Too, and this is a relatively minor point, we're asked here to refrain from just posting a link without giving excerpts or especially our own point of view on the subject or article we're linking to. In that post of yours a reader had to click on the link to find out what your point may be.

When I looked up the web site you had linked to it is described as biased, questionable, one-sided reporting, failed fact checks. I could actually tell that myself from some of the statements in the article.

It's not a case, I will guess, of Admin not allowing your post/s because of bias but that the information in the article you presented is NOT ACCURATE. And no, you don't get a pass because you just endured a case of COVID yourself.

You wanted to take a chance and the result was that you became infected with what sounded to me like more than a mild case of the virus. You described the worst of it here. I thought people were gracious - nobody celebrated that you were so ill, which could have been tempting given your previous statements about the pandemic and the vaccine.

The vaccination renders a high degree of immunity to the person who receives it. Being vaccinated helps a population to achieve herd immunity which is highly desirable to quench the power of this most transmissible potentially deadly virus. Another benefit of reaching high vaccination rates quickly is that it helps prevent mutations of the virus, which are even stronger and more deadly.

So first we do what we can as individuals to protect ourselves. And the second crucial part of the process is to protect those who can't receive the vaccine. If a person refuses a vaccine I fervently hope they at least follow the other precautions of masking and distancing (and good hygiene, it hopefully goes without saying).

Worldwide, 4.27M people have died with the diagnosis of COVID-19.

In the USA, it's 616K.

In Canada, it's 26,657.

That's reality, not "fear porn".

The fact that you survived a fight with the virus, although not a single moment of the process sounded like fun, is fortunate, not a blueprint for how it should be done. Many people wouldn't have survived the symptoms you had. As I said previously, you had a partner who could stay with you and keep you safe throughout your symptoms of dizziness and chills, etc, as well as access to as much medical advice and care as you wished to seek. Many don't have those luxuries or a strong enough constitution to survive the onslaught of the virus. Many can't take the vaccine themselves due to their health status, especially those who are immunocompromised from any number of causes (chemo, cancer, kidney disease, medications). That's why those who can safely receive the vaccine are not only helping themselves but others who cannot be vaxxed.

If a person doesn't care about that fact I give up.

I've read that each infected person transmits the virus to 6-9 other people, the reason the case counts can spiral quickly. (Also the reason we do contact tracing here in B.C. when someone is diagnosed with CV, which helps identify the source of infection in that sphere and any others who may be currently asymptomatic but capable of spreading the virus).

If a person doesn't care that they've potentially passed a potentially lethal virus to others I give up.

I still recall some of the patients I cared for in nursing and in particular a man who died from a bleeding disorder. His son sat at the bedside sobbing for a long time and I was so touched by the love he had for his father and his obvious deep grief at his loss. It reminds me how precious every person is to those who love them. A preventable loss is even more tragic and, if possible, even more painful for those left.

I don't care about the stupid (and likely inaccurate) 000000.0001% "stats" flung around in the article you posted. Can you say honestly that you also read information from other sources? The one you cited uses Ann Coulter as a guest commentator as well as a high-profile (understatement) politician and their offspring. Tell me this, Steve, when you were in the throes of your COVID fever or the wretched hypothermic chills did you take medicine and consult with your MD or did you call a politician?

If even a battle with COVID doesn't cause a re-examination of the issues and one's views and sources then the discussion is over.

That's all I've got.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/07/2021 05:34PM by Nightingale.

Thank you, Nightingale.

You expressed so well what I was unable to say.

Thank you!

Tevai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank you, Nightingale.
>
> You expressed so well what I was unable to say.
>
> Thank you!

I guess that if a group of individuals here want to ban together and agree that something is true, then it must be so, at least for them. Their paradigms allow-in, only information from so-called "official" sources. That at least feels safe. Any and all non-compliant information is deemed illegitimate. I hope that your kids and grandkids enjoy wearing masks around for the rest of their childhoods (if that's what they're told to do). Whether it makes sense or not is not the issue. All that matters is that there is consensus. Everyone who agrees, bow your head and say "yes".

One other possible option is to ask yourself if any of the information in the article might be correct. I used the term "fear porn". And it sure appears to be working on a lot of people so far. I used myself as an example of someone who does not want to operate by fear, and I don't. All that a few others gathered from that is that I thought I should have special dispensation to spread false information because I had Covid-19. It never has occurred to some people that the information that they're relying on might not be complete enough and might not be accurate. The official narrative is too often so compelling that it's easier to just disparage anyone who does not go along with it. This is the world your children and grandchildren will grow up in. So they better wear their masks and they had better not think for themselves. Is that what we want?

For what it's worth, I honestly figured that I had roughly a one-percent chance of dieing from Covid-19 with no advanced vaccination. I decided to take that risk before I got sick and didn't regret that decision between the time I got sick and when I recovered (or might have died). And my case wasn't mild. I came very close to going in to the hospital. But one thing more important than my own life, is not to be forced by others to operate by fear and information that is rife with discrepancies. That is especially true when I see discrepancies between what I was told by the so-called "experts" previously and what I am being told by them now. It's not the actual vaccination that has me worried, as much as the inability to reconsile several discrepancies in what we have been told previously vs how the story morphs over time, without answering a few critical questions that no one wants to talk about. If you've ever been gaslighted before, you know how it feels. And I feel too much of that going on right now to trust others with these critical decisions on my behalf.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/07/2021 04:29PM by azsteve.

> It never has occurred to some
> people that the information that
> they're relying on might not be
> complete and might not be accurate.


I'm not one such person. I don't have an unshakeable faith that the authorities know all there is to know about Covid, et alia.


Nobody should be credited with having complete and accurate information.

I have created a hierarchy of "credible" informants and their information. Nothing you have presented is suitable, based on my personal standards, for inclusion within the said hierarchy.

The basic narrative presented (allowed) here seems to increase the average individual's chances of staying healthy. But you seem to want to insert "liberty" and "freedom" into this health narrative, with nothing more in mind than partisanship.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/08/2021 01:59AM by elderolddog.

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > It never has occurred to some
> > people that the information that
> > they're relying on might not be
> > complete and might not be accurate.
>
>
> I'm not one such person. I don't have an
> unshakeable faith that the authorities know all
> there is to know about Covid, et alia.
>
>
> Nobody should be created with having complete and
> accurate information.
>
> I have created a hierarchy of "credible"
> informants and their information. Nothing you
> have presented is suitable, based on my personal
> standards, for inclusion within the said
> hierarchy.
>
> The basic narrative presented (allowed) here seems
> to increase the average individual's chances of
> staying healthy. But you seem to want to insert
> "liberty" and "freedom" into this health
> narrative, with nothing more in mind than
> partisanship.

It's really not about partisonship. But an arguement could be made that correlates my personal values (independence, not trusting others to look after my better interests when I have reasons to distrust them, suspicion of sources of information from people who just go along to get along) similar to others in my own political party. But that really is a secondary correlation. The difference is that I don't trust the Republicans to look after my best interests anymore than I trust the Democrats to look after my better interests. It's truely not political at this point. But you do tend to trust those more (from any party) who say things that make more sense to you based purely on trusting your built-in BS detector. If they are not giving us the right information (democrat or republican), the "why" they're doing it isn't so relevant.

Liberty and freedom have to enter in to the equation when our liberty and freedom are put at risk of loss. That's exactly where most of these discrepancies in information about Covid-19 really rear their heads. The promise was initially "two weeks of quarantine to level the curve" and "twenty-five percent of the people vaccinated to achieve full heard immunity". Either they were lieing then and they knew it, or those experts are absolutely and conclusively unqualified to be respected as experts at all. It wouldn't be as bad if not for the fact that the "truth" seems to morph continuously. Once again, it's like the church. The members will buy just about any kind of bullshit that the church wants to put out there, without reservations. What the church members are willing to accept is truely mind-boggling at times. Those of us with critical thinking skills learn to see through the bullshit, even if we don't know what the real truth is. We could find a way justify what the government and the experts are telling us now. But not when we know that they are being untruthful with us about at least some of it. And why they are doing it, is irrelevant. The target keeps moving. One way to establish an information foothold is to consider information like that found in the linked article. Maybe the information is good, maybe not. But the underlying logic is more perfect than the constantly-shifting information that the so-called experts are giving us now, which seems to lead to eerily similar results every time. For example, the experts keep throwing in new variables (types of new information that cause fear and justify more lockdowns, without even suggesting when the end of the pandemic might arrive, how and why . But the article gives some hard numbers and a viable theory as to how many of us should have permanent immunity now. It seems to address a lot of the monkey-wrenches that the experts toss in to the mix. The experts toss these variables in only to show us what victems we are, and not to basis to move forward from. "Just be very afraid and do what we tell you to do". I'me not buying a lot of it.

> It's really not about partisonship(sic).

Sure it is!


You have convinced yourself that you are clued into a more pure conduit to the truth than the rest of us. Your 'politics' is what drove you to exercise this privilege, not to mention the conclusions you've chosen.

There is no side to this discussion that has not embraced, to some degree, 'error'.

Right now your basic stance is seen as, "if the government in power endorses it, it's probably wrong." Your truculence is politically motivated. Because to you, it proves that you're a free man. Might as well apply for sovereign nation status!

Why do you feel the need to argue so strenuously regarding the issue of my personal health? ...talk about running a nanny state!

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why do you feel the need to argue so strenuously
> regarding the issue of my personal health?
> ...talk about running a nanny state!
===============================

So . . . what is it about the psychology of the azsteves of the world that COMPELS these to proselytize
in a very personal, something-is-in-it-for-me-if-I-can-convert-even-one, kind of way?
Observe and sniff a desperation to convert.
It is a NEED for others to "Believe as do I . . . please"

The context beyond the content. Tune beyond the words.


Isn't it curious?

Okay, steve, let's see if you are as honest as you claim.


--------------
> The promise was initially "two
> weeks of quarantine to level the curve" and
> "twenty-five percent of the people vaccinated to
> achieve full heard immunity".

You have expressed both of these falsehoods before and failed to document them.

1) You misrepresent the first proposition. No expert ever said two weeks of quarantine would eliminate the pandemic.

Think I'm wrong? Document it.

2) No expert ever said 25% vaccination would produce "full heard [sic] immunity."

Think I am wrong? Provide an example of an expert who ever said anything like that.


-----------------
> Either they were
> lieing then and they knew it, or those experts are
> absolutely and conclusively unqualified to be
> respected as experts at all.

No, they were not "lieing [sic]." They never said what you claim. You are lying by attributing false statements to them.


--------------
> the members will buy just about any kind
> of bullshit that the church wants to put out
> there, without reservations.

Yet you want us to accept your "bullshit." Don't think it's bullshit? Show us the proof.


-----------------
> Those of us with critical
> thinking skills learn to see through the bullshit,
> even if we don't know what the real truth is.

Amusing The truth is what you want it to be. If you want to be taken seriously as a critical thinker, you can indicate as much by SHOWING EVIDENCE THAT YOU ARE TELLING THE TRUTH rather than just repeating your previous lies.


--------------
> We
> could find a way justify what the government and
> the experts are telling us now. But not when we
> know that they are being untruthful with us about
> at least some of it. And why they are doing it, is
> irrelevant. The target keeps moving.

Uh, that's what scientists do when they have new evidence. That's why Galileo was not lying; why Newton was not lying; why Einstein was not lying; why Bohr was not lying; why Hawking was not lying. In science, the target ALWAYS keeps moving.


------------------
> One way to
> establish an information foothold is to consider
> information like that found in the linked article.
> Maybe the information is good, maybe not.

Your article recommends letting people get the disease and thereby acquire "natural immunity." It's a fascinating arguement [sic]. But why doesn't your source apply that logic to smallpox? Tuberculosis? The plague? Ebola?

For that's what consistency requires, is it not?


--------------
> But the
> underlying logic is more perfect than the
> constantly-shifting information that the so-called
> experts are giving us now, which seems to lead to
> eerily similar results every time.

It's a pity you don't understand how foolish that sentence is.


---------------
> For example,
> the experts keep throwing in new variables (types
> of new information that cause fear and justify
> more lockdowns, without even suggesting when the
> end of the pandemic might arrive, how and why .

That's some impressive critical thinking right there.


----------------
> But the article gives some hard numbers and a
> viable theory as to how many of us should have
> permanent immunity now. It seems to address a lot
> of the monkey-wrenches that the experts toss in to
> the mix. The experts toss these variables in only
> to show us what victems we are, and not to basis
> to move forward from. "Just be very afraid and do
> what we tell you to do".

Tell us victems [sic] again that you are not politically motivated.


----------------
> I'me not buying a lot of
> it.

That's fine. But you are still in violation of board rules against COVID misinformation.

Disagree? Prove your two contentions above. Until then, you are just another lemming who by dumb luck stumbled before he could leap from the cliff.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/08/2021 01:00AM by Lot's Wife.

I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating:

Thank you, Lot's Wife. I wish those you "pick on" knew how much patience you exhibit with them. I see it, and I appreciate it.
You're a much better person than I.

What a nice thing to say.

I should add that I always appreciate what you write. You are one of those people who comprise the deep pool of wisdom on which RfM floats.

azsteve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One other possible option is to ask yourself if
> any of the information in the article might be
> correct.

I did ask myself that, honestly I did. I conclude NO.

az:
>I used the term "fear porn".

*They* use the term, making it not original and also political because that is the context in which they use it.


az:
> It never has occurred to some people that the information that they're relying on might not be complete and might
> not be accurate.

Does it ever occur to you, Steve?

I've used masks since the onset of COVID. I've isolated when public health mandated or recommended it. I've been fully vaccinated. I still use masks in crowded places. I haven't contracted the virus. I haven't passed it on to anyone. I definitely absolutely did not want to get sick with COVID and I don't want to make anyone else sick (especially if they don't survive). I don't call that fear porn but rather a clear-headed, informed, responsible response to a pandemic threat.

OTOH, you declined vaccination. You contracted the virus. From the details you shared it sounds like you went through hell. That's precisely what I wanted to avoid for myself and my contacts.

I always avoided the annual flu shot because I was convinced I had become ill from it one year (when I had to get it due to working at a hospital) and I didn't want a repeat. Too, I had never had flu so the shot seemed like the more negative option to me. Two winters ago I contracted flu and it nearly killed me. Literally. You better believe I was first in line to get the flu jab the following year. I can learn from experience.


az:
> So they better wear their masks
> and they had better not think for themselves. Is
> that what we want?

Are you thinking for yourself, az? Or are you just going along with what you read in these magazines of yours?

I guess it's a question of which sources we choose to utilize and have confidence in. It always pays to re-evaluate from time to time, I find.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/07/2021 04:42PM by Nightingale.

azsteve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I guess that if a group of individuals here want
> to ban together and agree that something is true,
> then it must be so, at least for them.

1. It's "band" together. Call me biased, but I prefer sources that have medical degrees and can spell.

2. If this is an attempt to sound like a rebel against the tyranny of peer-reviewed articles, nice try Jan. Needs work.

> Their paradigms allow-in, only information from
> so-called "official" sources. That at least feels
> safe. Any and all non-compliant information is
> deemed illegitimate.

Guy, there's this process called "peer review." It's where the claims of the article are reviewed by other scientists and doctors. If the claims of the article don't hold up, the article is considered bunk. That's why the claim of "vaccines cause autism" is bullshit. It's also why the board has no patience for you and your COVID denial.

> I hope that your kids and
> grandkids enjoy wearing masks around for the rest
> of their childhoods (if that's what they're told
> to do). Whether it makes sense or not is not the
> issue. All that matters is that there is
> consensus. Everyone who agrees, bow your head and
> say "yes".

Oh, won't someone *please* think of the children?!

Here's how you at home can help our children not have to wear masks all the time in the future: stop acting like a fucking toddler, get vaccinated, and pull your head out of your ass.

>
> One other possible option is to ask yourself if
> any of the information in the article might be
> correct.

I wish you would do this, guy.

> I used the term "fear porn". And it sure
> appears to be working on a lot of people so far. I
> used myself as an example of someone who does not
> want to operate by fear, and I don't.

Guy, this sounds a hell of a lot like "it makes me feel bad, it's not true." I heard plenty of that as a TBM and it's not an accurate way of life. Pollyanna was a character in a diabetes-inducing story, not a doctor.

> All that a
> few others gathered from that is that I thought I
> should have special dispensation to spread false
> information because I had Covid-19.

No, we figured you thought that due to your overblown ego too.

> It never has
> occurred to some people that the information that
> they're relying on might not be complete enough
> and might not be accurate.

Again, I wish you would take your own advice.

> The official narrative
> is too often so compelling that it's easier to
> just disparage anyone who does not go along with
> it. This is the world your children and
> grandchildren will grow up in. So they better wear
> their masks and they had better not think for
> themselves. Is that what we want?

The reason kids would keep wearing masks is because of guys like you who think the Mayor Vaughn approach is the way to deal with COVID (". . .ignore the problem until it swims up and bites you in the ass!").

And what is with the hate-on you have for fabric and paper meant to keep infection from spreading?!

As for the rest of the crap you wrote, I thought going through COVID and surviving might have made you realize this is something to take seriously. Instead, you're doubling down on the bullshit and claiming you are smarter than the Center for Disease Control. You're not Galileo trying to prove the Earth revolves around the Sun, you're Don Quixote charging at mini-golf windmills.

Bitch all you want about how "were all picking on you" and "you used swear words, I win the debate," I don't care. Because I get my information from doctors, not dipshit Randriods.

I agree ookami. I find it of note that every person I know that has gotten Covid has the same kind of leanings as AZSteve. Including the one that died.

I am sure this little girl and her family are happy that they live in a state with a Governor who is against mask mandates. After all, their freeddumb is more important than her life.

https://abc13.com/houston-coronavirus-11-month-old-girl-with-covid-baby-treated-at-hospital-150-miles-away-hospitals-running-out-of-space-for-patients/10933199/

Yup, those Texas and Florida governors are doing a killer job.

<<That is especially true when I see discrepancies between what I was told by the so-called "experts" previously and what I am being told by them now.>>

That's called adjusting/adapting to new information. It's actually a good thing.

Steve, what objection do you have at this point to getting a Covid vaccine? The Pfizer vaccine is now on track to getting full FDA approval within the next 3-4 weeks. Moderna will likely follow within a month or so after that. What more do you want than full approval?

These vaccines have been tested on humans for up to a year and a half now. The mRNA technology upon which the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were based has many years of study and development under its belt.

Do you get other vaccines? Flu? Tetanus? MMR? What's so different about a Covid vaccine?

Thank you, Nightingale, for being reasonable and bringing facts to a BS fight.

Thanks ookami. I try.

I’ll mask up when there are minors around. Unless the stats change on how sick vaccinated people get, I’m not gonna worry about unvaccinated adults. I know there are ones with legitimate reasons to not vaccinate, but they are few. The majority of others are the kind of people who the world could use fewer of anyway. Let them thin their own herd. Yeah go ahead, flame me.

NormaRae Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I’ll mask up when there are minors around.
> Unless the stats change on how sick vaccinated
> people get, I’m not gonna worry about
> unvaccinated adults. I know there are ones with
> legitimate reasons to not vaccinate, but they are
> few. The majority of others are the kind of people
> who the world could use fewer of anyway. Let them
> thin their own herd. Yeah go ahead, flame me.

I am not going to flame you, but please consider that everyone who is unvaccinated and is not in some kind of quarantine is not only making a potentially life-threatening (and incredibly expensive!!) decision for themselves, but they are potentially "deciding" for all of those they come in close [or close ENOUGH] contact with.

We--most every human being on the planet right now--are not just "us"--individual human beings acting however we might wish on this.... we are ALSO responsible for those who might contract Covid from us if we have not taken proper precautions (vaccine shots, wearing masks, avoiding crowded situations).

When it comes to Covid, you literally ARE "your brother's [and sister's] keeper."

If you make the decision to NOT get vaccinated, and to NOT mask, and to NOT avoid crowded situations, and someone contracts Covid from you or anything which might carry Covid on your person (your clothes, your hands as you touch things in the supermarket, your sneezes, etc.), YOU are responsible for that person's Covid if you have not taken precautions against this happening.

I don't want to be responsible for ANYONE inadvertently catching Covid from me, and I will continue to do whatever I can to prevent this happening until this pandemic has been officially declared over.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/07/2021 05:59PM by Tevai.

Tevai, I'm fully vaccinated and will be wearing a mask at school along with everyone else in the building.

The parents of my students are mostly in public-facing jobs. They are, and always have been, at high risk of contracting Covid. I don't want to get Covid, and I certainly don't want to pass it along to my vulnerable students. I don't want them to take the disease home to their loved ones.

Two of my students already lost family members to Covid. As far as I am concerned, the buck stops with me.

I agree absolutely.

Way to go, summer!!

:)

You’re quite a girl, Summer. :)

Very glad to see that the US vaccination rate is climbing, despite the continued resistance of many on the Republican side in particular. Vaccination remains the only way out of the delta problem.

Australia has a different version of this problem. We have been very successful in defending against Covid over 18 months, due to our isolation and reasonable governance and compliance.

However, our vaccination rate is abysmal, only about 22% (full). This is because of complacency and poor messaging around the apparent differences between various vaccines available to us - also lack of supply.

Currently over half our population is under indefinite lockdown again because the delta variant is resisting the usual suppression techniques (short sharp lockdown, quarantine, internal border closures and contact tracing). There's no obvious way out, until we can get our vaccinations way up, which will take a long time.

Can't wait until this is over and we can get back to worrying about catastrophic climate change.

Good to hear from you. Thanks for the info. So too bad about lack of vaccine supply. I read today that over 60K doses in the US just expired. Ouch. Hope things improve soon.

Hi Nightingale / LW

Our govt has been belatedly trying to get access to some of those soon to expire US stocks, but perhaps those should be going to other nations with dire shortages and massive infections anyway.

We definitely were complacent early on, in not joining the unseemly auction process for the first available stocks.

I still think we have had it fairly easy overall, and should reach reasonable vaccination rates by the end of the year.

Then we will just wait for the Omega variant, which will rear up somewhere exotic and the game will start over again...

oldpobot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Nightingale / LW
>
> Our govt has been belatedly trying to get access
> to some of those soon to expire US stocks, but
> perhaps those should be going to other nations
> with dire shortages and massive infections
> anyway.
>
> We definitely were complacent early on, in not
> joining the unseemly auction process for the first
> available stocks.
>
> I still think we have had it fairly easy overall,
> and should reach reasonable vaccination rates by
> the end of the year.
>
> Then we will just wait for the Omega variant,
> which will rear up somewhere exotic and the game
> will start over again...

My OH and I are part of the 22% fully vaccinated here in Australia. Our local GP surgery didn't mess about....if you hadn't already had your flu jab that was scheduled for four weeks after your first Covid jab then you were given the appointment for the second Covid. All very efficient plus we were given jelly snakes for being brave.

oldpobot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can't wait until this is over and we can get back
> to worrying about catastrophic climate change.

When it rains, it pours. Except for when it doesn't rain.

Good to hear from you, OPB.

Resistance to vaccination is harmful, both to the individual and society. People are afraid of the needle, and they make wild excuses for it. There's nothing controversial about vaccination. Ignorance and fear are the biggest threat to my country right now. The threat comes from within, and is so widespread that we even see it here. It's time to roll up our sleeves.

Tell it to the governor of Utah, and the legislators who passed the bill the prohibits schools to protect our children by prohibiting mask mandates!

How do you think I feel, sending my grandchildren off to school, in a state with the lowest vaccination rate (along with 6 other backwards states), to spend those hours enclosed, where over 50% of the unvaccinated children will not be wearing a mask, and 50% of maskless adults, teachers, custodians, volunteers will not be wearing a mask. (In our community it is the unvaccinated that refuse to wear a mask--same people, so maskless people need to keep their distance from me and my family.).

My own grandchildren (the "unvaccinated" are children, people!) will of course wear a mask, but they slip, the kids constantly touch them, the kids eat lunch, the maskless sneeze on others.

And I'm talking about something harmless--a MASK does not harm, but it will save lives, and save long-term crippling! A freakin' mask--come on, people!

I get so angry at anti-vaxxers, that I want them to get sick. I now anti-vaxxers who have had dear ones DIE of Covid, yet they still won't get innoculated, and their teen children won't, and their little kids won't, when the time comes. One unvaccinated grandma is always around her little grandchildren, hugging and kissing them, and the grandchildren's parents are AFRAID OF HURTING GRANDMA'S FEELINGS, and won't tell her to distance or wear a mask.

If this is "political" in a democratic sense, then, where is our voice, as the majority of parents? OUR CHILDREN will be the victims in all of this!

Absolutely true. Because so many idiots failed (or chose) to not get vaccinated, thus allowing for variants that are much more infectious.

Thanks.

COVID is just like religion. Lot’s of bullshit and a little bit of truth and everyone is playing an angle.

That's a pretty stupid thing to say.

I suppose, Rubicon, that you think this man who is dying is lying.

https://www.heraldsun.com/news/coronavirus/article253247308.html

A Virginia man’s decision to post videos documenting his COVID-19 treatment has slowly turned into a tragic confessional that he could now die due to avoiding a vaccine.

Travis Campbell of Bristol, Virginia, was diagnosed with the potentially fatal infection in late July and soon began posting video updates on Facebook.

Among the first was a video saying he did not want prayers because “I believe the path’s already set.”


“I truly regret not getting the vaccine,” Campbell said in a post. “I’m testifying to all my bulletproof friends that’s holding out. It’s time to protect your family, it’s not worth getting long term lung damage or death please go get the vaccine.”

Campbell also blames himself for infecting his children, who he says are experiencing a rattling cough, dizziness, diarrhea and dehydration.

“I realize I could have prevented this. I’m over the stupid conspiracies. It’s time to be rational and protective. It’s not worth being stubborn like I did,” he wrote.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports more than 35 million people have been infected with the virus in the U.S. and more than 614,000 have died as of Aug. 4. Infection rates have recently begun to worsen, as the current 7-day average of “daily new cases (66,606) increased 64.1% compared with the previous 7-day moving average (40,597),” the CDC reported last week.