The Vaccine

[Acard7]

Except that children under 12 don't have an available vaccine today. So what you are saying is those kids just have to wing it....some will die, most won't and tough shit for the ones that die? Or did I misunderstand you?

In his defense, you're understanding what he's saying different than me. My understanding: He isn't saying continue in-school sessions no matter what, no lockdown no matter how many deaths there are.. There's ways around it, and even the World Health Organization has come out to say they aren't supportive of lockdowns anymore unless all other measures have been exhausted. We had a school 30 minutes South from us cancel today and tomorrow due to covid positives and quarantine guidelines they set, which puts parents in quite a bind BUT this is what the school set up to protect their kids. Another about 40 minutes West from us cancelled all homecoming festivities due to covid positives and possibly may have to reschedule the game tomorrow pending tests. Many of the schools around us have "return to learn plans" for covid purposes, obviously. In Iowa there is an online format that is free, not sure if kids could register it now but that has been an option well before covid. I'm sure this is the same for many states, so there are ways around still getting the education they need and being safe. Do the parents have the means to do that though? That's another long discussion to be had..

We are at such a crossroads when it comes to Covid, I know vaccination is now statistically the only way we get out of this mess, and have told that to people that are against the vaccine.. But my generation and younger have all of a sudden decided that even normal vaccinations that we grew up getting are no longer needed and going to a damn chiropractor is better than a doctor for illnesses.

Being dicks to each other isn't gonna fix this any faster, on both sides of the aisle. Those that have made up their minds have done so, and we need to learn to live with it I suppose.

 

[mwalker4]

Central Ohio is about to hold one of 12 super spreader events throughout bars across the area, known as OSU football games. This year we a starting at a high daily case level of 7,000 daily cases and most bars and restaurants do not have any precautions. So I'm guessing we should see a pretty good spike. Hospitals have some ICU capacity but it's getting tight. So it might be an interesting few weeks.

 

[Tgen2013]

We can discuss vaccine mandates in this thread, although in the end it won't make any differences as none of us are responsible for making these decisions.

Regarding the vaccine, however, it is easy to find out who to believe. Follow the science and the scientists, not the pseudo-science and those that espouse these views. Don't let emotions cloud one's decision. Don't be afraid to question what you might hear or read. Seek multiple opinions. Personally if 9 out of 10 scientists, doctors, or other public health experts say one thing and 1 out of 10 say something else, I'm likely going to give the 9 out of 10 opinion more weight.

Given my profession, I'm trained to be skeptical, but to also follow the facts. There is no such thing as alternate facts. I'm also open minded, and encourage others to do so.

Jim

Yes but your 9 or 10 instantly becomes 1 when the source does a 180 mid stream, then tries to imply they never made the original position. (Fauci/CDC/WHO). They all suck.................................

 

[Robconn]

Yes but your 9 or 10 instantly becomes 1 when the source does a 180 mid stream, then tries to imply they never made the original position. (Fauci/CDC/WHO). They all suck.................................

As the understanding of science changes so does the prevailing position. Covid is no different. You don’t give any credit for a disease that has essentially caught everyone off guard with no playbook and as our understanding of it increases we will naturally share our discoveries and admit what we once thought was true is not. That transparency seems to fuel more distrust. A purist only sees black and white. I have taken certain positions with current events. In the future, I may come to a completely different conclusion based on subsequent experiences. That’s just being realistic. Yes, it’s frustrating to have our medical experts retract prior statements made. Personally, I don’t rely on fauci to tell me one out of 17 vents was vaccinated in order to convince me of the benefits vs risk regarding covid.

 

[Jim_in_Delaware]

Yes but your 9 or 10 instantly becomes 1 when the source does a 180 mid stream, then tries to imply they never made the original position. (Fauci/CDC/WHO). They all suck.................................

Sorry, not biting.

If you want to have a meaningful discussion, I'm back in.

Jim

 

[Evil Sports]

Fixed that for you.

Do me a Favor, Dont Ever speak for me.

 

[swatski]

Do me a Favor, Dont Ever speak for me.

--

 

[2kwik4u]

Do me a Favor, Dont Ever speak for me.

Noted.

I'll add in that precision of speech is a pet peeve of mine as well as an acute understanding of need versus want. You don't HAVE to say anything. We're all here because we WANT to be. Participation is voluntary and the premise that you HAVE to say something gives it the air or premise that you had no choice or that somehow there was an inherent nobility in you statements; which is NOT the case......that goes for all of mine and everyone else here.

My apologies for adding more weight to your comments than warranted.

 

[tabbibus]

Do we want vaccines in our arms? Not really.

Do we need vaccines to get out of this without more death and heartbreak? Probably.

 

[Evil Sports]

If you did have an understanding then you would know far too well Not to speak for others. Especially people you know virtually nothing about

 

[seanmclean]

Except you know, his edit was correct. *shrug*

 

[Evil Sports]

Its amazing how impowering a message board is for people that never had a voice. Please continue

 

[the MfM]

As are those who have a car accident, have a heart attack, need a knee or hip replacement or have any other medical need. Medical care is delayed if available to them at all.

Using my son as an example, several clinical studies for his life limiting disease are on hold due to this pandemic. I have watched him go from walking to a wheel chair at 11. Potential treatments for him and tens of thousands of other American children are pushed further and further into the future as Americans refuse to get vaccinated and or to bear the small inconvenience of wearing a mask.

I think we feel the same way regarding access to care being a major problem. If we could wave the proverbial magic wand and vaccinate every one then we would be better off. But paying for that slice of cheese requires going without other important things.

My son was also in a wheelchair for years and required extensive medical treatment until he died at the age of 14 five years ago. From the time of his TBI in 2002 we experienced firsthand a decline in the quality of care and access. Even with tri-care and private insurance.

Maine extended the vaccine mandate for HCWs 4 weeks yesterday. So while we all may disagree if this is a good development or not my thoughts are with you and your family.

 

[Julian]

In his defense, you're understanding what he's saying different than me. My understanding: He isn't saying continue in-school sessions no matter what, no lockdown no matter how many deaths there are.. There's ways around it, and even the World Health Organization has come out to say they aren't supportive of lockdowns anymore unless all other measures have been exhausted. We had a school 30 minutes South from us cancel today and tomorrow due to covid positives and quarantine guidelines they set, which puts parents in quite a bind BUT this is what the school set up to protect their kids. Another about 40 minutes West from us cancelled all homecoming festivities due to covid positives and possibly may have to reschedule the game tomorrow pending tests. Many of the schools around us have "return to learn plans" for covid purposes, obviously. In Iowa there is an online format that is free, not sure if kids could register it now but that has been an option well before covid. I'm sure this is the same for many states, so there are ways around still getting the education they need and being safe. Do the parents have the means to do that though? That's another long discussion to be had..

We are at such a crossroads when it comes to Covid, I know vaccination is now statistically the only way we get out of this mess, and have told that to people that are against the vaccine.. But my generation and younger have all of a sudden decided that even normal vaccinations that we grew up getting are no longer needed and going to a damn chiropractor is better than a doctor for illnesses.

Being dicks to each other isn't gonna fix this any faster, on both sides of the aisle. Those that have made up their minds have done so, and we need to learn to live with it I suppose.

I sent my 16 year old daughter back to in school learning vs virtual. Made that choice months ago (pre delta variant). We are sticking with it and hoping that enough kids are vaccinated in her school to prevent too many adverse reactions. Our neighbors with kids under 12....they are really struggling. There is no easy answer. It is a terrible choice no matter what, and all I can hope is that they approve under 12s soon! The next variant could well be one that shifts even younger.....as the virus moves into the population that it can (unvaccinated kids) more easily.....its just the nature of how these viruses propagate. If there is a new strain the infects kids more easily....it will spread....and infect more kids, and morph as it finds ways to spread.

Do any of us want to "derail education" - no f'ing way!

But in the face of a rampant health crisis....where the deaths of kids is the alternative, we will have to choose sub optimal education methods like virtual school (which is WAY sub optimal!!!). I am hoping my daughters school can remain open - but she's in school in an area where vaccine adoption is VERY HIGH. This can't be said for MANY areas, and for grade schools.

 

[Acard7]

I sent my 16 year old daughter back to in school learning vs virtual. Made that choice months ago (pre delta variant). We are sticking with it and hoping that enough kids are vaccinated in her school to prevent too many adverse reactions. Our neighbors with kids under 12....they are really struggling. There is no easy answer. It is a terrible choice no matter what, and all I can hope is that they approve under 12s soon! The next variant could well be one that shifts even younger.....as the virus moves into the population that it can (unvaccinated kids) more easily.....its just the nature of how these viruses propagate. If there is a new strain the infects kids more easily....it will spread....and infect more kids, and morph as it finds ways to spread.

Do any of us want to "derail education" - no f'ing way!

But in the face of a rampant health crisis....where the deaths of kids is the alternative, we will have to choose sub optimal education methods like virtual school (which is WAY sub optimal!!!). I am hoping my daughters school can remain open - but she's in school in an area where vaccine adoption is VERY HIGH. This can't be said for MANY areas, and for grade schools.

Very glad y’all could make it work, we live next to teachers and they said trying to do virtual classroom sessions for those that stayed home while others went to school were an absolute nightmare. And online at home really rests on the kids effort and parents ambition.. I definitely agree there will have to be some sort of alternative if this variant or the next variant gets to the kids.. Maybe even having school year round to make up for missed days/weeks.. Who knows though..

The only thing we can do is hope enough get vaccinated to slow it down and/or they approve the vaccine for younger.. I bet we are only months away from approval for the younger population

 

[MidnightRider]

I see this statement of "risk analysis" being thrown around a lot lately. As if looking strictly at data makes it a no brainer for every person out there, and if they go against the data then they are stupid, ignorant or selfish. Since when has human risk analysis ever only been about the data? There is so many more factors that go into human risk analysis. You can't compare your risk analysis of a situation or decision with the risk analysis of another human being. Take someone who was told a vaccine is safe and then ends up with a debilitating handicap from it. You think his risk analysis is going to come to the same conclusion as yours, I'd argue not only will it not but I'll go one step further and say it shouldn't. You may say risk analysis should be only by the data, fine you can say that and it may be logical but its not reality when it comes to humans.

A free climber that climbs mountains with out any ropes or harnesses may be considered stupid by most people and potentially putting rescuers at risk if something happens. This climbers risk analysis has factors of not really even feeling like life is worth living if he doesn't do this. I remember getting chastised by an adult acquaintance about letting my 6 yr old son ride his bike to his friends house. They couldn't understand with all the data out there on kids getting in accidents and abductions etc etc that I would risk letting him venture out on his own in our neighborhood. My risk analysis was very different of this situation/decision than theirs was, who are they to question my decision?

Its never a simple calculation, its always extremely complex and personal, laced with past experiences good and bad. I actually have a close friend of mine that took care of his family when they all got sick with covid. He didn't get it, even though he tended to them without mask or distancing. On top of it he is one who had very bad reaction to a "safe" vaccine 5 years ago that left lasting issues to this day. How can you or I compare his risk analysis for determining whether or not the covid vaccine is safe to our own risk analysis.

Bottom line is, everyone is going to do their own risk analysis based many many factors complex, personal, real data, etc and come to their own conclusion. That doesn't mean they are selfish, stupid, ignorant if it doesn't line up with your conclusions - it means they lead a different life than you and came to a different decision than you based on their own risk analysis. Its their choice and I'm sorry in my book you have to just be ok with that. "Just do a simple risk analysis".... ummm they did, you (meaning a general you) just don't like it, so think its ok to judge and/or attack them.

 

[AZMark]

I see this statement of "risk analysis" being thrown around a lot lately. As if looking strictly at data makes it a no brainer for every person out there, and if they go against the data then they are stupid, ignorant or selfish. Since when has human risk analysis ever only been about the data? There is so many more factors that go into human risk analysis. You can't compare your risk analysis of a situation or decision with the risk analysis of another human being. Take someone who was told a vaccine is safe and then ends up with a debilitating handicap from it. You think his risk analysis is going to come to the same conclusion as yours, I'd argue not only will it not but I'll go one step further and say it shouldn't. You may say risk analysis should be only by the data, fine you can say that and it may be logical but its not reality when it comes to humans.

A free climber that climbs mountains with out any ropes or harnesses may be considered stupid by most people and potentially putting rescuers at risk if something happens. This climbers risk analysis has factors of not really even feeling like life is worth living if he doesn't do this. I remember getting chastised by an adult acquaintance about letting my 6 yr old son ride his bike to his friends house. They couldn't understand with all the data out there on kids getting in accidents and abductions etc etc that I would risk letting him venture out on his own in our neighborhood. My risk analysis was very different of this situation/decision than theirs was, who are they to question my decision?

Its never a simple calculation, its always extremely complex and personal, laced with past experiences good and bad. I actually have a close friend of mine that took care of his family when they all got sick with covid. He didn't get it, even though he tended to them without mask or distancing. On top of it he is one who had very bad reaction to a "safe" vaccine 5 years ago that left lasting issues to this day. How can you or I compare his risk analysis for determining whether or not the covid vaccine is safe to our own risk analysis.

Bottom line is, everyone is going to do their own risk analysis based many many factors complex, personal, real data, etc and come to their own conclusion. That doesn't mean they are selfish, stupid, ignorant if it doesn't line up with your conclusions - it means they lead a different life than you and came to a different decision than you based on their own risk analysis. Its their choice and I'm sorry in my book you have to just be ok with that. "Just do a simple risk analysis".... ummm they did, you (meaning a general you) just don't like it, so think its ok to judge and/or attack them.

A true risk “analysis” would not include the level of opinion and feelings that you are including in most of your explanation. Two totally different things.

Your child faces the exact same level of risk riding through the neighborhood, regardless of who is performing the analysis.

Yes, a person with a diagnosis or history of problems with vaccines has a different risk profile. The rest is all opinions, beliefs, prejudices, etc and has zero bearing on actual risk.

 

[MidnightRider]

A true risk “analysis” would not include the level of opinion and feelings that you are including in most of your explanation. Two totally different things.

Your child faces the exact same level of risk riding through the neighborhood, regardless of who is performing the analysis.

Yes, a person with a diagnosis or history of problems with vaccines has a different risk profile. The rest is all opinions, beliefs, prejudices, etc and has zero bearing on actual risk.

Thank you Professor AZMark.... Now lets get back to reality and talk about what all humans actually do when analyzing risk... AKA my point.

Edit: mood of this reply == tongue and cheek, not trying to be an ass.

 

[AZMark]

Thank you Professor AZMark.... Now lets get back to reality and talk about what all humans actually do when analyzing risk... AKA my point.

I understand your point, it’s just incorrect.

Analyzing and accepting/ignoring are two different things. Don’t need to be a professor to understand that.

 

[adrianp89]

I understand your point, it’s just incorrect.

Analyzing and accepting/ignoring are two different things. Don’t need to be a professor to understand that.

Perception is important. A .05% chance of dying from COVID. It is what it is, statistically. You might think that's high, I think it's low.

More reading:

Estimating everyday risk: Subjective judgments are related to objective risk, mapping of numerical magnitudes and previous experience

We aimed to investigate individual differences that associate with peoples’ acute risk perception for activities such as walking and giving birth, including objective risk and the mapping of numerical magnitudes. The Amazon Mechanical Turk platform ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov