Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Coronavirus

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
So, your chance of dying from COVID19, even if unvaccinated are just slightly higher than the flu if you are under 50 and have no health issues.
This is false. Most of the influenza deaths are also in the elderly and those with health issues, in most seasons (2009 was a bit of an exception but it still generally behaved that way). While the risk does change relative to flu dependent on age, this is mostly because influenza doesn't drop in risk quite as fast as Omicron (probably because there is a "floor" of vulnerable individuals which both COVID and influenza will kill). So the risk relative to influenza when unvaccinated is somewhat similar regardless of age (risk goes up exponentially with age, increasing by about 3x for each decade for both flu and COVID, with some reduction in the risk ratio in young people as mentioned). With B.1.1.7 it was about 5x-20x worse than flu if unvaccinated. Perhaps we're slightly lower than that now if unvaccinated, but hard to know at the moment.

This whole idea of most people who die being older is such a silly talking point. It's just repeating what the COVID cranks say. Most people die when they are old. What's relevant is the increase in risk...you're not supposed to die when you're young! And the "health issue" thing is also silly. These people, again, are at elevated risk for any illness. But the risk for healthy young people ALSO increases substantially with COVID around (and the increase in risk due to transmissible disease goes up dramatically - possibly by more than 15x - because the healthy people are likely not part of that influenza "floor" in the plot below). (This is pre-Omicron.)

With Omicron, perhaps things are as much as 3x better (doubt it is more than that), but it's still going to be a substantial increase in risk as compared to influenza.

For some reason, it's slightly more frustrating to me to see someone who decided to not complete their vaccination series and only get 2/3rds of the way through, than it is to see people straight up refuse. I guess maybe it's just even more logically inconsistent? (And it also shows how damaging the booster messaging was - some people seem to think this booster is required due to the variant, or is important to prevent infection, neither of which are true (though a side effect is preventing infection in some cases).)

Screen Shot 2022-01-19 at 9.46.33 AM.png


The WHO and numerous countries agree with what I’ve posted about being cautious or limiting young men to one dose.
I think this is a reasonable course of action at the current time. One dose in young men probably does limit the downside risk substantially (and you can always do two in special cases and probably many countries allow that). I think the tradeoffs on two doses is probably harder to assess - depends on efficacy with one dose, how much that one dose reduces COVID myocarditis risk, and a host of other factors which are hard to determine. But one is better than zero.

It's the idea of not getting vaccinated at all that makes zero sense. But the idea that we're talking about parents making the decision between one dose or two...no...that's not really the current issue, unfortunately. If it were there wouldn't be any discussion. I have no problem with a parent deciding to get one dose of vaccine only for their male child for the time being until there is more data. (Though it would not be my personal choice.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Doggydogworld
Right, that makes sense. Myocarditis is an inflammatory reaction, which would be transitory. But if that inflammation damaged the conduction system of the heart, which is pretty sensitive to inflammation as I understand it, then it would result in various arrythmias. The conduction system is nervous tissue, so I personally don't have high hopes for a lot of resolution of these problems, long-term.

There is some good news on this (preventing it, not repairing it). Though we'll see how this picture holds up. Would be great if this effect is substantial and durable. There were some early reports that vaccination might improve long COVID symptoms but this study does not address that.

I wonder how much COVID-19 heart damage goes undiagnosed (and is one of the causes of some of these symptoms).

In any case this is positive news for the vaccinated who end up getting infected in this wave.

 
Last edited:
If you want to deep dive, read the references on that paper. That is a summary study, it's just aggregating all of the many studies that have been done on this.

Again - people don't want to get vaccinated, I don't care anymore. But, don't come to me expecting to raise my taxes to pay for their increased costs of healthcare through Medicaid, etc. either. This knife cuts both ways.
I have never been worried about other people's vaccination status. I feel like I have sufficient protection with my 2 shots of Pfizer in June
 
I have never been worried about other people's vaccination status. I feel like I have sufficient protection with my 2 shots of Pfizer in June

Hey, you were the one questioning the validity of Long Covid syndrome. I simply provided you the data. Your anecdotal "but my 25 friends" is just that - anecdotal. There are 100 million documented cases of Long Covid.
 
This was VERY interesting data. Basically, it looks like effectiveness plateaued after the 3rd dose. As the 4th dose didn't offer any real protection.

Basically, the antibodies only partially protect against Omicron, and boosting them further didn't help (I mentioned this in an argument we had about a month ago in this thread). We've gotten as much as we can out of the current shots, at least in respect to Omicron.
My SO had her booster (4th) shot yesterday which was 5 months after her 3rd full shot. She has an autoimmune disease and takes meds. Antibodies didn't show for any test after the 1st or 2nd shot. She held off her meds for a week after the 3rd full shot and a test at 4ish weeks showed antibodies. Having an antibody test in mid-Feb for antibodies and one indicator on whether we can/should travel to FL in March. All 4 have been Moderna. Hopefully here b-cells and t-cells are active too.

Doc via: American College of Rheumatology (https://www.rheumatology.org/Portal...nical-Guidance-Rheumatic-Diseases-Summary.pdf)

6I2IMxW.jpg

FcWt0Rv.jpg
 
My SO had her booster (4th) shot yesterday which was 5 months after her 3rd full shot. She has an autoimmune disease and takes meds. Antibodies didn't show for any test after the 1st or 2nd shot. She held off her meds for a week after the 3rd full shot and a test at 4ish weeks showed antibodies. Having an antibody test in mid-Feb for antibodies and one indicator on whether we can/should travel to FL in March. All 4 have been Moderna. Hopefully here b-cells and t-cells are active too.

Doc via: American College of Rheumatology (https://www.rheumatology.org/Portal...nical-Guidance-Rheumatic-Diseases-Summary.pdf)

6I2IMxW.jpg

FcWt0Rv.jpg

That's a very specific case, and I agree a 4th dose in the immunocompromised could be worthwhile. I should have specified I was referring to the population in general, not high-risk groups.

In her case, I've known immunologists that just keep giving vaccine doses until they see an antibody response.
 
Hey, you were the one questioning the validity of Long Covid syndrome. I simply provided you the data. Your anecdotal "but my 25 friends" is just that - anecdotal. There are 100 million documented cases of Long Covid.
There are way too many variables that aren't addressed in the study. How many of them were vaccinated without booster? How many with booster? How many were unvaccinated? Did they have health conditions? All those things matter when assessing risk to yourself based on such study.
 
There are way too many variables that aren't addressed in the study. How many of them were vaccinated without booster? How many with booster? How many were unvaccinated? Did they have health conditions? All those things matter when assessing risk to yourself based on such study.
Did you read the meta? It doesn't sound as if you did.

 
Can't wait til this ineffective mask mandate ends in this country, especially since soooo many types of masks are "accepted" even though they don't help in any way at all. Either mandate proven to be effective masks only or remove the mandate all together. Almost no one wears any sort of effective mask anyway. Certainly not in Los Angeles.
If the mask mandate is useless and no one wears one, why do you care so much that there is a mask mandate in place?
 
If the mask mandate is useless and no one wears one, why do you care so much that there is a mask mandate in place?
You obviously didn't understand my post.

I don't care that there's a mask mandate to begin with. I don't wear one anywhere unless i have to in order to go inside of a building. No other time do I think of wearing one. I'm not at all concerned with what anyone else does around me. Mask up or don't. Makes no difference. That said, if there has to be a mandate and such an emphasis on masks, then don't make it so broad of a mandate that it allows for people with just anything covering their mouth and nose to pass as being masked. Even if CDC has their specific mask recommendations, no one follows them because majority of people who mask up feel they are doing their part, even if they have some piece of fabric as a mask. It makes the mandate completely useless if some people are choosing to use something that provides very little to no protection and we as a collective view that and treat that as the exact same thing as someone wearing an N95 or the like.
 
So, your chance of dying from COVID19, even if unvaccinated are just slightly higher than the flu if you are under 50 and have no health issues. This pandemic is mostly affecting the elderly.
Yeah, who cares about old people, anyway. 🙄 If we want to bring up anecdotes - the only people I know who have been hospitalized from COVID are un-vaccinated and under 50 or right around 50.

If I had a teenage boy he’d get a single shot of Pfizer and I’d call it a day.
The data indicates that two shots of Pfizer is safe along with the third shot as well for teenagers - otherwise they would not have been approved. My teenage son just his booster - a bit tired for half a day, then back to normal (just an anecdote which doesn't mean much in the bigger pitcture).

It's the idea of not getting vaccinated at all that makes zero sense. But the idea that we're talking about parents making the decision between one dose or two...no...that's not really the current issue, unfortunately. If it were there wouldn't be any discussion. I have no problem with a parent deciding to get one dose of vaccine only for their male child for the time being until there is more data. (Though it would not be my personal choice.)
Exactly - everyone that I've talked to who bring up myocarditis use it as an excuse to avoid vaccines altogether, avoiding the nuance of the situation - the details of which we've hashed out ad-nauseam already. The benefits of approved vaccines outweigh the risks of COVID for individuals - and when you consider your surrounding community, it's a no-brainer.
 
the only people I know who have been hospitalized from COVID are un-vaccinated and under 50 or right around 50.

Me too. All the people I know of personally (meaning I have met them in person) who have been hospitalized are in their 30s and 40s. Fortunately none have died, though one was on a ventilator for about six weeks (she was unvaccinated by choice). Back at home, still on supplemental oxygen last I heard, months later. Doing well, I guess? The others were "minor" brief hospitalizations.

Also, about 50% of the people I know who have had COVID have been hospitalized (I know about 6 people, none over 60, who have had it at this point). It's not like I don't know anyone, either! It's just that certain communities have had very low incidence.

So yeah, anecdata is not too valuable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KG M3 and scottf200
I can't find any official statistics on long term complications. What I know from my circle of acquaintances and friends, MANY of them had COVID and none of them had any lasting damage. However, none of my friends are in a high risk demographic. I know tons of people who had it.. Me and my wife (she had 2 shots Moderna and I had 2 shots Pfizer) just had scratchy throat which is common with Omicron and we both tested negative, so we have doged the bullet so far.. We do NOT take any precautions and frequently meet with friends and very few people here in Central Florida use face masks.. maybe 20%...

Long COVID has not been studied in depth yet. It's going to be a major strain on world economies with extra healthcare costs and lost productivity for decades. I have a mild case (asthma got worse), my partner has a moderate case.

I've done neurofeedback and my partner has been trained to be a provider. Her clinical supervisor can now spot long COVID in a brain map. He's one of only a very few brain experts in the world who are looking for it. He's been educating other people in how to spot the patterns. COVID can cause brain damage.

From what we know now, long COVID can hit younger people who have mild cases more than older people. It appears to be an auto-immune disorder. My partner has been reading every scientific paper on long COVID she can find. So far there isn't much, but it's real and it can destroy a person's quality of life. And in at least some cases it might be permanent.

Fortunately it looks like Omicron might be less likely to cause long COVID, but it still affects the nervous system and could cause it. My partner's long COVID didn't get worse when she had it last month. But she's on an experimental medication course for long COVID (small dose naltraxone) that might have prevented the damage from getting worse.
 
Long COVID has not been studied in depth yet. It's going to be a major strain on world economies with extra healthcare costs and lost productivity for decades. I have a mild case (asthma got worse), my partner has a moderate case.

I've done neurofeedback and my partner has been trained to be a provider. Her clinical supervisor can now spot long COVID in a brain map. He's one of only a very few brain experts in the world who are looking for it. He's been educating other people in how to spot the patterns. COVID can cause brain damage.

From what we know now, long COVID can hit younger people who have mild cases more than older people. It appears to be an auto-immune disorder. My partner has been reading every scientific paper on long COVID she can find. So far there isn't much, but it's real and it can destroy a person's quality of life. And in at least some cases it might be permanent.

Fortunately it looks like Omicron might be less likely to cause long COVID, but it still affects the nervous system and could cause it. My partner's long COVID didn't get worse when she had it last month. But she's on an experimental medication course for long COVID (small dose naltraxone) that might have prevented the damage from getting worse.
The biggest strain on world economies came from shut downs. Sweden never shut down or required social distancing or face masks and their numbers aren't much different than similar sized countries that did shut down
 
Just wondering, what stops an elderly person from protecting themselves with the number of vaccinations of their choice?
Just wondering why you don't understand that the vaccinations aren't 100% protection?
The biggest strain on world economies came from shut downs. Sweden never shut down or required social distancing or face masks and their numbers aren't much different than similar sized countries that did shut down
"The Swedish prime minister Magdalena Andersson has announced a new series of coronavirus-related national measures as Sweden grapples with an increased burden on its healthcare system."
 
Just wondering why you don't understand that the vaccinations aren't 100% protection?

"The Swedish prime minister Magdalena Andersson has announced a new series of coronavirus-related national measures as Sweden grapples with an increased burden on its healthcare system."
Vaccines have a very high level of protection and vaccinated and unvaccinated alike can spread it. Everyone's choice what they do for their own healthcare.
 
The biggest strain on world economies came from shut downs. Sweden never shut down or required social distancing or face masks and their numbers aren't much different than similar sized countries that did shut down
It’s true that Sweden didn’t fare much worse than a number of other European countries which implemented “lockdowns” and stricter masking rules.

On the other hand, Sweden shares a long common border with Norway. Norway (NOR) implemented much more aggressive public health policies against Covid and had dramatically fewer cases and deaths than Sweden (SWE) while actually doing better economically.

841624F3-8CE5-4E11-851B-00D572AFEC29.jpeg


A similar pattern plays out if you compare the aggressive public health measures taken in much of Asia compared to the slower and after-the-fact responses in Europe and the US. Those Asian countries (China, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Vietnam, etc) had far fewer cases and deaths while keeping businesses generally open and life otherwise relatively normal.

Most of Europe and the US picked a middle response — not fast and aggressive but with late and sometimes harsh countermeasures when health care facilities were being overrun.