Covid-19 News/Discussion

[Xenos]

1 hour ago, MookieMonstah said:

If I made a thread to discuss how the Earth is a planet it would also be an echo chamber, but the people agreeing would still be correct😊😊😊

[TVScout]

FYI:

Boosters and Extra Doses for Those At Risk

https://www.vaccines.gov/

 

COVID-19 Vaccines for Moderately to Severely Immunocompromised People.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/immuno.html

[mission27]

On 10/16/2021 at 5:22 PM, Tugboat said:

Yeah.  It obviously wouldn't be a representative sample of any kind.  You can only glean so much information from that sort of data.  But it'd still be nice to see more readily.

 

I get that they also want to protect the idea of any vaccine will do.  Because any vaccine is orders of magnitude better than no vaccine at all.  And the JJ single shot is obviously the best chance at appealing to people still on the fence.  Ease and accessibility is a factor.  It'd just be interesting to see the numbers, even if you can't form a strong conclusion from them.

Like...we already know from the trials, that the J&J had a noticeably lower efficacy against the original strain to begin with.  That information was readily available and shared pretty widely.  I'm just really curious how that projects out against the variants and breakthrough cases.

Yeah it would be interesting to see

6 months ago I understood why public health officials wanted to maintain the illusion that three vaccines are basically the same.  Now it really doesn't make sense.  There are differences and ample supply across the country of all 3, help people understand the pros and cons of each and make a personal decision.  That would seem like the best way to encourage people to get vaccinated.  

As it stands people already kind of understand the differences in side effects, efficacy, etc. from media reports and are hearing conflicting and borderline inaccurate information from public health officials with further reduces trust. 

[TVScout]

Antibody tests can’t give answers you want about covid-19 immunity.

Talk of the need for coronavirus booster shots has prompted many Americans to seek antibody tests.

In most cases, however, getting an antibody test to determine immunity is a fool’s errand, infectious-disease doctors agree. The tests for antibodies, also known as serology tests, do not provide the answers that most people are seeking.

Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration advise against using antibody tests to determine one’s level of immunity against covid-19. So does the Infectious Disease Society of America, which represents infectious-disease specialists.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

Logged into Facebook to post pictures of my puppy who is turned 1 about a week ago. First thing I see on my feed is someone comparing COVID to pooping your pants.

I hate the people in this country.

[ramssuperbowl99]

16 minutes ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Logged into Facebook to post pictures of my puppy who is turned 1 about a week ago. First thing I see on my feed is someone comparing COVID to pooping your pants.

I hate the people in this country.

If you know what's good for you, you best start posting those puppy pictures.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

24 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

If you know what's good for you, you best start posting those puppy pictures.

On it, Chief.

[Xenos]

Vaccine lotteries did not help unfortunately. Probably one reason why we had to move to mandates bows

https://news.yahoo.com/state-covid-lotteries-did-not-172919399.html

Quote

What they found: Researchers examined vaccination rates in 19 states before and after their lottery announcements and concluded that the association between the two variables was "statistically indistinguishable from zero," the study noted.

Compared with states that didn't have vaccine lotteries, the study found that there was essentially "zero difference" in the vaccination rates of states that held vaccine lotteries and those that didn't, Friedson said in a news release.

 

[TVScout]

Free:

Opinion: Finally, an answer for Johnson & Johnson vaccine recipients. Here’s what I chose.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/20/leana-wen-johnson-johnson-booster-pfizer/

 

At least 65,000 more men have died of covid-19 than women in the United States by the end of August, according to a study by the Brookings Institution.

Israel identifies case of mutated ‘descendant’ of delta variant.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/10/20/covid-delta-variant-live-updates/#link-AY6DLUIPEJBGNNNUPRDUSE6XSI

 

[Xenos]

Just need the CDC approval now.

 

[Xenos]

@ramssuperbowl99 and @Shanedorf, what do you think about all this mixing and matching?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/10/20/fda-clears-johnson-johnson-and-moderna-booster-shots-for-millions-of-people.html

[ramssuperbowl99]

5 hours ago, Xenos said:

@ramssuperbowl99 and @Shanedorf, what do you think about all this mixing and matching?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/10/20/fda-clears-johnson-johnson-and-moderna-booster-shots-for-millions-of-people.html

I'm all for it, and disappointed it took so long.

The vaccines all work the same way, it's a big salty brick of RNA instructions that give your immune system a blueprint against the same thing. The difference between them is the stuff around the brick to keep it from falling apart in the blood stream before it can teach your immune system. 

So, once the drug is picked up by our cells, the immune system takes over and which one you took doesn't matter anymore. We'd hypothesize that there is no scientific reason we couldn't cross-dose from a safety or efficacy perspective, and that's what the data show.

This finally lets us close the J&J one shot gap that we've dealt with for way too long. 

[Tugboat]

53 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

I'm all for it, and disappointed it took so long.

The vaccines all work the same way, it's a big salty brick of RNA instructions that give your immune system a blueprint against the same thing. The difference between them is the stuff around the brick to keep it from falling apart in the blood stream before it can teach your immune system. 

So, once the drug is picked up by our cells, the immune system takes over and which one you took doesn't matter anymore. We'd hypothesize that there is no scientific reason we couldn't cross-dose from a safety or efficacy perspective, and that's what the data show.

This finally lets us close the J&J one shot gap that we've dealt with for way too long. 

Do they really work the same way?  Because i was under the impression that the mRNA vaccines were operating on a fundamentally differently principle than the viral vector stuff.

 

I can understand why mixing vaccines might work, and why it might even theoretically actually provide a stronger immunoresponse.  Via the "tricksy hobbit, never know what it's got in its pockets" vector.  And honestly, i've seen some sketchy indications from Mix-master-Canada, that in certain population groups and situations...a "mixed dose" might actually provide more protection.  In the same way results started to show that extending the interval from first to second dose actually provided a more effective treatment.

 

But when the line is, "we hypothesize", it's not very compelling imo.  When people are skeptical of the science...it takes more than a "scientific we think" to convince.  Like...that ain't even passing muster for me.

[Tugboat]

On 10/18/2021 at 7:41 AM, mission27 said:

Yeah it would be interesting to see

6 months ago I understood why public health officials wanted to maintain the illusion that three vaccines are basically the same.  Now it really doesn't make sense.  There are differences and ample supply across the country of all 3, help people understand the pros and cons of each and make a personal decision.  That would seem like the best way to encourage people to get vaccinated.  

As it stands people already kind of understand the differences in side effects, efficacy, etc. from media reports and are hearing conflicting and borderline inaccurate information from public health officials with further reduces trust. 

This is where the conspiracy cooks have a point.

 

In a system that was purely concerned with effectiveness and containing the spread via vaccination...you'd make available the data on which vaccine is the "Best Product".  But they don't want to do that.  Because it might hurt one of the Pharma-giants reputations.

 

Information is funneled through a narrow, money-lubed scope...

[ramssuperbowl99]

19 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

Do they really work the same way?  Because i was under the impression that the mRNA vaccines were operating on a fundamentally differently principle than the viral vector stuff.

Ahh you're right - Pfizer and Moderna work the same way. J&J is different. My bad on that.

20 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

But when the line is, "we hypothesize", it's not very compelling imo.  When people are skeptical of the science...it takes more than a "scientific we think" to convince.  Like...that ain't even passing muster for me.

For a vaccine where the mechanism of action is the same, there's no reason to suspect otherwise. So what I said applies for Moderna/Pfizer. I'd agree that J&J would need more data supporting it.