-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Coronavirus
- Thread starter Wenche
- Start date
My wife tells me that her hospital is about to break. They are putting patients in the hallways. Nurses she has known for decades have been packing it in for weeks there because they can't take it anymore. She said a quiet Filipino nurse quit mid shift last week when they told her she had to take 2 more patients in addition to the 7 telemetry patients she already had. She just took her plant out of the office and walked out. I hope the predictions that this peaks and has a fast decline in the next couple weeks is true. The hospital is paying $175/hour or more for agency and traveling nurses because there are few hospital employed ones left. She said everyone needs to stay out of the hospital at this point. It's just too dangerous. If you have to go into the hospital you better find someone to stay with you to take care of you. There just aren't enough nurses any more.
Curious as to your opinion on the following as I encounter many stubborn people who still believe that it's only worth it for 40+ to get vaccinated:
COVID vaccines + boosters for the 5-12 yo, 12-18 yo, 18-40 yo groups
I've had people argue "My son's (not sure of exact age) got COVID 3 times - not only does he have immunity now but the risk of myocarditis is worse than COVID!"
My response is that myocarditis risk is less even in the highest risk groups (teenage boys) from vaccines than COVID - but they remain unconvinced, none-the-less.
Also not sure how to reconcile the claim that having COVID 3x means that you're immune - obviously the first two tries didn't do it, either. Either way, mRNA vaccines (not sure about J & J or A-Z for all demographics) are safer than COVID itself.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Honestly, if you are talking to someone that stubborn and that much of a know-it-all, I don't think there is anything you could say or show them that would prove them wrong. Lots of people these days don't exactly view data objectively.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yeah, far higher. I don't understand why this misinformation lives on. There was uncertainty early, but vaccine-induced myocarditis is now known to be a rare non-issue nearly always resolved by NSAIDs. Misinformationists have taken that responsible caution from health authorities (they didn't just immediately push vaccines to children - I think we should have, given the balance of risks and the benefits of doing so, but I'm arguably irresponsible) and run with it.
Yep, weird delusional stuff. People seem to lack understanding of the variability of immune system responses to infection. Sometimes infection-acquired immunity works ok. In some people it doesn't.
The vaccines also aren't perfect, but they're a lot more consistent, is what the data show, as far as I can tell. So natural immunity from vaccination (especially after a booster) looks superior, at a population level. For any particular individual, that might not be true (some lucky individual might get very good protection after a couple infections). But for most people, it would be more protective to have the vaccine's natural immunity. (Obviously safer too.)
I'm no immunologist, for sure, but just looking at the publicly available data, if antibodies are a correlate of protection, that's the situation here.
It does sound like you get mucosal immunity from infection - but if your overall response is weak that's not much help. And of course you get an antibody response to a diverse range of epitopes with an infection. But again, with a weak response, not much help. But that underlying breadth is probably why people who are boosted with three doses on top of infection-acquired immunity have the strongest & most neutralizing immunity. Doesn't come for free though (lots of risk). (The reverse sequence (vaccine -> infection) is good but not quite as good probably since the body doesn't need to respond with as much breadth to clear the infection - it's already primed. Total armchair speculation on my part though.)
All flowcharts lead to vaccination, in any case.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
It sounds like you're focusing on protection against infection. Consider the protection against hospitalization & death. That makes the booster clearly superior. The booster is also way better against infection, but it's only something like 60-70% effective before waning vs. Omicron so not good enough for most people to think it is "working" if they focus only on infection. (But 60% is still awfully good.)
At the moment, there's not enough data to know how protection against severe disease will evolve over time (simply not enough time has passed) but there's reason to think that while it may degrade somewhat (some people simply can't afford breakthrough infections), you'll likely be far better off with the booster after a long period of time, as compared to two doses, even without further boosting.
Keep in mind with that "low" 60% efficacy and so many people vaccinated we'll just lose sight of all the people who have had infections completely prevented by their booster - there are tons of breakthroughs. But vaccines are still preventing infection all the time.
Vaccines are not an infection vector. They themselves don't cause illness. They generate an immune response which if excessive, can cause damage to cells. Any myocarditis that is caused by an immune reaction to the vaccine is self-limiting. It will respond to treatment. And it is apparently extremely rare. My wife has never seen a case of vaccine induced myocarditis in 2 years now. Virus induced myocarditis, if it doesn't respond to treatment because the virus continues to replicate itself, can cause serious damage or death, the vaccine doesn't. My wife has seen lots of cases of COVID induced myocarditis. To be clear my wife is an adult cardiologist so only sees patients 18 and older. People just don't understand how vaccines work.
Last edited:
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
In other news, it doesn't look like the US will quite get to the 1million/day 7da of cases. Looks like the declines in the Northeast are going to be enough to offset the continued rises in California/Texas/Florida. And it looks like due to their large prior waves maybe Texas and Florida won't see quite as high a spike (though I think that's a bit unclear still how that will play out...possibly they are just a bit delayed, I don't know).
So maybe we'll get to 900k? Depends on how all the other little states play out and how rapid the decline in the Northeast is. I think it'll start looking quite rapid next week though. Looks likely to be a nationwide peak next week (with many states not yet at their peak).
There will be a long tail though...probably going to be March before we see levels similar to October.
So maybe we'll get to 900k? Depends on how all the other little states play out and how rapid the decline in the Northeast is. I think it'll start looking quite rapid next week though. Looks likely to be a nationwide peak next week (with many states not yet at their peak).
There will be a long tail though...probably going to be March before we see levels similar to October.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
In modern vaccines, yes this is true. But a cautionary tale, and why vaccine development is strictly regulated at least in the USA, is that we have some poor marks in history of very VERY poorly designed vaccines that caused far more damage than the disease they were designed to treat. These historical notes do not help in the arguments with anti-vaxxers, but must always be remember by scientists working on new vaccines.
This is the classic one we are taught about in medical school:
Brief History and Characterization of Enhanced Respiratory Syncytial Virus Disease | Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
In 1967, infants and toddlers immunized with a formalin-inactivated vaccine against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) experienced an enhanced form of RSV disease characterized by high fever, bronchopneumonia, and wheezing when they became infected ...
journals.asm.org
Research shows why 1960s RSV shot sickened children
Researchers from Johns Hopkins have solved the decades-old mystery of why a vaccine developed to prevent a common childhood viral infection wound up making kids sick.
www.reuters.com
The 1960s RSV vaccine actually caused something caused "enhanced respiratory disease" which was worse than the RSV-caused disease which it was aiming to vaccinate against.
My point - we all to a degree roll our eyes when we hear of someone complain about a vaccine reaction, but we must (especially physicians) keep in mind that sometimes (hopefully very rarely), they do happen. We have to learn from these events, both as clinicians, and as scientists, to continue to make vaccines even more safe than they are now.
Yes, you are correct. I was only speaking about the new mRNA and the more modern vaccines, not older vaccines like especially the live virus vaccines. Sorry if that may have confused anyone but I was trying to keep it simple. In the past some vaccines actually did give people diseases. Even the J+J and other virus vector vaccines are designed to not make people sick.In modern vaccines, yes this is true. But a cautionary tale, and why vaccine development is strictly regulated at least in the USA, is that we have some poor marks in history of very VERY poorly designed vaccines that caused far more damage than the disease they were designed to treat. These historical notes do not help in the arguments with anti-vaxxers, but must always be remember by scientists working on new vaccines.
This is the classic one we are taught about in medical school:
Brief History and Characterization of Enhanced Respiratory Syncytial Virus Disease | Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
In 1967, infants and toddlers immunized with a formalin-inactivated vaccine against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) experienced an enhanced form of RSV disease characterized by high fever, bronchopneumonia, and wheezing when they became infected ...journals.asm.orgResearch shows why 1960s RSV shot sickened children
Researchers from Johns Hopkins have solved the decades-old mystery of why a vaccine developed to prevent a common childhood viral infection wound up making kids sick.
The 1960s RSV vaccine actually caused something caused "enhanced respiratory disease" which was worse than the RSV-caused disease which it was aiming to vaccinate against.
My point - we all to a degree roll our eyes when we hear of someone complain about a vaccine reaction, but we must (especially physicians) keep in mind that sometimes (hopefully very rarely), they do happen. We have to learn from these events, both as clinicians, and as scientists, to continue to make vaccines even more safe than they are now.
Last edited:
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
I was wondering the other day if the mild endemic corona viruses started out as bad as COVID and then mutated themselves into benign, nuisance viruses.
From what I heard the other day the wastewater testing in Boston and, I think, the Bay Area have found COVID in the wastewater falling off a cliff almost as fast as it rose. We might see case counts drop dramatically in the next few weeks, though people who got seriously ill might remain sick for longer.
IMHO that is a terrible waste of time. Hard to parse and while it may drive home the point that there are a lot of cases....much better ways to do that.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Best estimates are these coronaviruses are centuries to millennia old. So no know knows the answer to that definitively.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yes, it is possible we peaked on Friday or perhaps this weekend. We’ll see in the next few days. Right about on time. Coming soon, in any case.
scottf200
Well-Known Member
Quick visual site comparing 'green' to 'red'.
Page: See where cases are rising and falling for all 50 states:
Have we flattened the curve in the US? - Johns Hopkins
Daily Confirmed Case Trends (7-Day Moving Average) in the US
coronavirus.jhu.edu
scottf200
Well-Known Member
This guy makes some interesting graphs. Pretty crazy how Omicron spread "simultaneously" in Jan '22 across the world. Reported cases x4 (ie. 7 to 28).
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yes, definitely looks close to a peak.Quick visual site comparing 'green' to 'red'.
Page: See where cases are rising and falling for all 50 states:
Have we flattened the curve in the US? - Johns Hopkins
Daily Confirmed Case Trends (7-Day Moving Average) in the US
This is big, if true:
Last edited:
So how long did it take to find out that there were problems with those vaccines? Many people today are saying these new ones were not researched enough and they are afraid of what "may" come out later. Is that a reasonable fear? And if so how long should they wait?In modern vaccines, yes this is true. But a cautionary tale, and why vaccine development is strictly regulated at least in the USA, is that we have some poor marks in history of very VERY poorly designed vaccines that caused far more damage than the disease they were designed to treat. These historical notes do not help in the arguments with anti-vaxxers, but must always be remember by scientists working on new vaccines.
This is the classic one we are taught about in medical school:
Brief History and Characterization of Enhanced Respiratory Syncytial Virus Disease | Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
In 1967, infants and toddlers immunized with a formalin-inactivated vaccine against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) experienced an enhanced form of RSV disease characterized by high fever, bronchopneumonia, and wheezing when they became infected ...journals.asm.orgResearch shows why 1960s RSV shot sickened children
Researchers from Johns Hopkins have solved the decades-old mystery of why a vaccine developed to prevent a common childhood viral infection wound up making kids sick.
The 1960s RSV vaccine actually caused something caused "enhanced respiratory disease" which was worse than the RSV-caused disease which it was aiming to vaccinate against.
My point - we all to a degree roll our eyes when we hear of someone complain about a vaccine reaction, but we must (especially physicians) keep in mind that sometimes (hopefully very rarely), they do happen. We have to learn from these events, both as clinicians, and as scientists, to continue to make vaccines even more safe than they are now.
Similar threads
