Coronavirus: What questions do you have?

[afadeev]

President Biden is reportedly going to mandate, today, that all federal employees receive the vaccine or be tested weekly.

I will be watching this one. I am a fan of personal liberty, but it is time that we do something to end this pandemic but I am not sure that "something" is. This may send some federal employees to the unemployment lines.

I can relate to many of these sentiments.
By now, the tradeoff has been crystalized to that between personal freedom to not vaccinate vs. impingement on others' personal freedom of not being exposed to a deadly virus.
This question has been debated and litigated in the past. In many countries. The tradeoff has consistently been settled in favor of protecting public health and securing the public safety. Supreme Courts exact words were:

"[r]eal liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person to use his own [liberty], whether in respect of his person or his property, regardless of the injury that may be done to others."​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts
I might be more sympathetic to the position of vaccination objectors if they were offering any alternative public health mitigation measures.
Or were at least proponents of, or adherents to, wearing masks. Alas, the vocal minority (and their media propagandists) are devoid of any practical solutions.
Aggressive denial or reality (aka North Korea) is no way to govern a civilized society.

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

As of yesterday , if you want to continue collecting military VA benefits , you must be vaccinated.

Not true. You do NOT have to be vaccinated to receive VA benefits.

 

[boomtube-mk2]

If the goal is to reduce the number of positive tests for Covid19 to zero.
We'll be wearing masks forever.

So what EXACTLY is the goal?

 

[kuririn]

If the goal is to reduce the number of positive tests for Covid19 to zero.
We'll be wearing masks forever.

So what EXACTLY is the goal?

To keep people from dying.

 

[boomtube-mk2]

To keep people from dying.

But they will never be able to do that anymore than they can stop people from dying from the flu.
So I ask again; what exactly is the goal that has to be reached before all this hysteria comes to an end?

 

[Peartree]

But they will never be able to do that anymore than they can stop people from dying from the flu.
So I ask again; what exactly is the goal that has to be reached before all this hysteria comes to an end?

I would assume that the goal is to reach an acceptable level of disease, whatever that level may be once we arrive at some consensus on what level is needed to prevent undue burden on the health system and prevent contagious spread.

Oddly however, one thing that we *have* done in the last year is to prove that, in fact, we *can* "stop people from dying from the flu." The question that now arises is that, having proven that these community health actions are do-able and attainable, will we willingly return to the old paradigm that 50,000 deaths per year from the flu are reasonable?

 

[kuririn]

Look at the number of flu cases and deaths after people started wearing masks.
Dramatically down.
Goal of mask wearing is to cut down the number of infections.
Reduce the number of infections, then you reduce the number of hospitalizations and deaths.
Same thing with social distancing and hand washing.
Everybody is going through mandate fatigue, myself included.
I would rather have things return to the pre-pandemic state.
But the reality is that there is a surge in infections due to the Delta variant.
Goal never was to reduce the number of positives to zero.
Goal is to keep infections as low as possible.
Many experts feel that Covid will become endemic, i.e. always with us.
If we can minimize the breakouts and infections and get more people vaccinated then we might be able to live with it like the flu.
And go back to some semblance of normal.

 

[boomtube-mk2]

I'm not sure we actually stopped anybody from dying from the flu. I think those deaths just got buried under the Covid19 death count.

But even if what you wrote is true; do we shut down the nation and have everybody wearing masks 24/7/365, staying six feet apart, in perpetuity, so as to prevent X% fewer flu deaths per year?

 

[CalebJ]

I'm not sure we actually stopped anybody from dying from the flu. I think those deaths just got buried under the Covid19 death count.

Are you kidding?

How many times are we going to rehash that madness????

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

If the goal is to reduce the number of positive tests for Covid19 to zero.
We'll be wearing masks forever.

So what EXACTLY is the goal?

I think the goal needs to be to reduce or eliminate hospitalizations and death, and the way to do it is to get everyone eligible vaccinated.

Vaccinated people have a lower chance of catching covid, but as we’re are learning, it’s not zero. But when vaccinated people catch covid, they very rarely end up in the hospital or die. It’s not zero either, but it is so vanishingly close to zero, it might was well be for any given individual. It’s like one in a million. What vaccinated people get when they get covid is something between nothing at all and a bad cold. They don’t die or go into the hospital.

Same for kids. When kids get covid, they almost never end up in the hospital or die. The number is not zero, but’s also so close to zero, it might as well be for most individual kids. They get something about as severe as a vaccinated adult — mild symptoms up to something like a bad cold.

Our goal can’t be to eliminate everything approaching the level of a bad cold. I think if we got every adult vaccinated, then we would eliminate almost all hospitalizations and deaths, and we could all get back to our lives and go without masks, and the most we would be risking would be something like a bad cold.

 

[boomtube-mk2]

What madness?
That if somebody contracted both the flu and Covid19 and dies, that the cause of death is going to be listed as the flu?
No, it will be listed as Covid19.

 

[boomtube-mk2]

Yes, we absolutely need to get as many people vaccinated as is possible, but from what I am hearing out of Washington, they don't seem to believe that the vaccine is really that effective since they want even people who have been vaccinated to wear masks.
This is like having the driver in a car wear a crash helmet because there's somebody in the next lane riding a motorcycle.

 

[kuririn]

But even if what you wrote is true; do we shut down the nation and have everybody wearing masks 24/7/365, staying six feet apart, in perpetuity, so as to prevent X% fewer flu deaths per year?

And that brings us back to the argument at the beginning of this pandemic.
Covered multiple times in multiple threads some 16 months ago.
What is the trade off between saving millions from this infection versus the economic and social damage of mitigation procedures?
I can't answer that, you must decide for yourself.
(BTW, nobody is advocating wearing masks 24/7/365 in perpetuity. When cases were down the mask mandates were largely lifted, remember?)

 

[kuririn]

This is like having the driver in a car wear a crash helmet because there's somebody in the next lane riding a motorcycle.

More like driving a car next to a big semi on the highway and making sure your family is buckled up.
You're protected by thousands of pounds of metal surrounding you (vaccination) and the odds of the semi crashing into you are remote (covid infection rate) but any conscientious person would still be using their seat belt (mask).

 

[Bowman]

I am a fan of personal liberty, but it is time that we do something to end this pandemic but I am not sure that "something" is. This may send some federal employees to the unemployment lines.

Please try to keep the posts to questions with no political comments.

Don't be too optimistic.

The VA hospital announced that all patient-facing employees were required to be vaccinated or subjected to testing.
Less than 24 hrs later released a follow-up to all employees stating that all someone had to do to be exempt was to provide a signed letter stating that they declined based on their religion. No questions asked, no supporting documentation required. There is a surprising number of healthcare professionals declining vaccination.

No spine existing... I won't say more than that.

 

[kuririn]

I'm not sure we actually stopped anybody from dying from the flu. I think those deaths just got buried under the Covid19 death count.

You can read this from John Hopkins, a pre-eminent medical institution:
Covid-19 Story Tip: Flu Cases Dramatically Low So Far This Season (hopkinsmedicine.org)
Basically, all the things we are doing to reduce the spread of Covid also reduces the transmission of the flu.
Masks, social distancing, hand washing, lockdowns and quarantines, etc.
Doesn't that make sense?

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

Yes, we absolutely need to get as many people vaccinated as is possible, but from what I am hearing out of Washington, they don't seem to believe that the vaccine is really that effective since they want even people who have been vaccinated to wear masks.
This is like having the driver in a car wear a crash helmet because there's somebody in the next lane riding a motorcycle.

No, that’s not what they are saying. They are not saying that the vaccine is not effective. What they are saying is that the vaccine does not prevent people who are vaccinated from spreading the virus if they become infected with the delta variant, and that’s because the delta variant is more infectious. So with the new variant, that protective feature of the vaccine is diminished, but what is NOT diminished is the vaccine’s ability to keep you out of the hospital and morgue. The vaccine is very effective at saving lives and preventing hospitalizations. Don’t take the wrong message from the new mask mandates.

Also the vaccine is still good at preventing infections and shedding, just not as good against delta as it was against the original strain. So personally, I don’t really think vaccinated people really should need to wear masks, because this spike is mostly unvaccinated people infecting unvaccinated people, not vaccinated people having breakthrough infections and infecting others. I understand they are doing it because there is some risk from vaccinated people too, but I think it’s low, and I think they are mainly just requiring it because we don’t have the so-called “passport” system, and we need unvaccinated people to mask up, and the only way to do it is to require vaccinated people to do it too. The one major drawback to that approach is it leads to the same kind of misinformation you posted that the vaccines don’t work.

Personally, I think people should get vaccinated to save their own lives, and I’d prefer not to wear a mask because I’m vaccinated. I’d like to resume my normal life and let the unvaccinated people figure it out for themselves. But it seems like people’s survival instincts and sense of personal responsibility have gone down the toilet, so now we ALL need to go back to wearing masks to save the idiots from themselves, at least in the short term.

 

[boomtube-mk2]

But at 627,000+ deaths, in the U.S. alone; did we really prevent the spread of Covid19?
Or did we just spread the number of dead over a longer period of time?
Which could be considered a good thing in in and of itself but look at the social and economic costs of it.

If we had just continued with "Business as usual"; would the death count have been substantially higher or would those same 627,000 people have died just in a shorter span of time?

 

[boatgeek]

If the goal is to reduce the number of positive tests for Covid19 to zero.
We'll be wearing masks forever.

So what EXACTLY is the goal?

You know, at first blush, my response was basically what's above--to reduce the numbers of illnesses and deaths. Past shutdowns have been about keeping the hospitals from being overwhelmed so that we didn't have massive increases in death rates because we simply couldn't provide care to COVID (and other) patients. They were also supposed to give us breathing room until Warp Speed brought us a vaccine.

Now, I'm honestly not sure what to think. On the one hand, we as a society want to keep the health system from being overwhelmed. There's also a societal benefit to minimizing spread to minimize the number of new variants. On the other hand, if we've more or less run out of people who are willing to be vaccinated, there's no point in slowing COVID down so that we can distribute a vaccine. The jerk in me says that people who (a) don't want a vaccine and (b) aren't willing to take any precautions for their own safety can just go hang. If they don't want a nanny state protecting them, go ahead and let 1-3% of them die. And when Eta or Zeta or whatever erases natural immunity from having caught COVID Original Flavor or Delta, another 1-3% of them will die. I'll get my update shot, suck up 24-36 hours of side effects, and go on with my life.

There's only so much effort I want to put into trying to save people who don't want to grab the lifering that's been thrown to them.

 

[boatgeek]

But at 627,000+ deaths, in the U.S. alone; did we really prevent the spread of Covid19?
Or did we just spread the number of dead over a longer period of time?
Which could be considered a good thing in in and of itself but look at the social and economic costs of it.

If we had just continued with "Business as usual"; would the death count have been substantially higher or would those same 627,000 people have died just in a shorter span of time?

The models said that if we did nothing, we'd have 1.5 to 2 million deaths in the first 3-6 months. With hard lockdowns, that number was substantially reduced. Yes, that's based on models, but those models were also pretty decent at predicting the winter surge so I think it's fairly reasonable to trust that they're within 10%-20% or so.

If you don't like models, look at how hospitals in New York, Italy, India, etc. were completely overwhelmed when cases spiked, making it so care had to be heavily rationed or was simply unavailable. That could have been nationwide for a few months. Not something
I like to contemplate.

 

[kuririn]

If we had just continued with "Business as usual"; would the death count have been substantially higher or would those same 627,000 people have died just in a shorter span of time?

Sweden tried "business as usual".
See the data in my post here:
Perhaps the DUMBEST health policy change in recent history | Page 8 | The Rocketry Forum

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

But at 627,000+ deaths, in the U.S. alone; did we really prevent the spread of Covid19?
Or did we just spread the number of dead over a longer period of time?
Which could be considered a good thing in in and of itself but look at the social and economic costs of it.

If we had just continued with "Business as usual"; would the death count have been substantially higher or would those same 627,000 people have died just in a shorter span of time?

It did slow it down, and slowing it down saved lives, because it bought time for the vaccine to be developed, and it preserved hospital capacity so that we had resources to treat heart attacks, strokes, accidental injuries, etc.

 

[NateB]

Same for kids. When kids get covid, they almost never end up in the hospital or die. The number is not zero, but’s also so close to zero, it might as well be for most individual kids.

Sadly, the cases involving kids and younger adults are growing and growing in severity.

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

You know, at first blush, my response was basically what's above--to reduce the numbers of illnesses and deaths. Past shutdowns have been about keeping the hospitals from being overwhelmed so that we didn't have massive increases in death rates because we simply couldn't provide care to COVID (and other) patients. They were also supposed to give us breathing room until Warp Speed brought us a vaccine.

Now, I'm honestly not sure what to think. On the one hand, we as a society want to keep the health system from being overwhelmed. There's also a societal benefit to minimizing spread to minimize the number of new variants. On the other hand, if we've more or less run out of people who are willing to be vaccinated, there's no point in slowing COVID down so that we can distribute a vaccine. The jerk in me says that people who (a) don't want a vaccine and (b) aren't willing to take any precautions for their own safety can just go hang. If they don't want a nanny state protecting them, go ahead and let 1-3% of them die. And when Eta or Zeta or whatever erases natural immunity from having caught COVID Original Flavor or Delta, another 1-3% of them will die. I'll get my update shot, suck up 24-36 hours of side effects, and go on with my life.

There's only so much effort I want to put into trying to save people who don't want to grab the lifering that's been thrown to them.

I’m kind of at the same point. I’m willing to do this masking thing ONE LAST TIME to give the stragglers a chance to save themselves. But that’s it. There’s only so much you can do for people.

This virus is so contagious that I think you either get the vaccine, or you get covid. Simple as that. And it’s just a matter of time, even with the masks and restrictions. Masks and restrictions are about buying time, but we’ve already bought all the time we need. Let’s get this over with.

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

Sadly, the cases involving kids and younger adults are growing and growing in severity.

I know that is true, but I think it is still pretty low. Cases and severity are increasing, but from a very low baseline. That said, I think everyone over 12 is now eligible, and they should all get the vaccine. And if it’s approved for younger kids, maybe they should too. If I had kids, I would immunize them.

 

[boomtube-mk2]

And now there is a new variant showing up in Florida.
Well I've got a freezer full of pizza and a pantry full of Merlot . . . I'm ready for anything!!

Sadly these "Vaccines" are more along the lines of what people get each year for "The Flu" as apposed to what we all got years ago for smallpox and polio and the like.
Henceforth, we'll all be getting our yearly "CovidXX" shots along with our yearly flu shot.
Or perhaps they'll combine them into one.

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

Today was a rough day. We are consistently testing more and more and now 20% positive sustained. 25% of those are vaccinated. I have a young patient admitted and intubated with no risks. It is a good time for prayer in whatever you believe.

Chuck, I’m very sorry to hear about how difficult this is

I do have a question about the 25% of the positive tests being vaccinated. I think sometimes people see a statistic like that and say, “See, vaccines don’t work.”

So my question is, what percentage of the people you are actually seeing hospitalized have been vaccinated? I have heard that when a breakthrough infection occurs, the vaccine is still very effective at keeping the vaccinated person out of the hospital and preventing them from dying. Is that what you are seeing? Are 25% of your covid hospitalizations vaccinated to match the 25% of your positive tests who are vaccinated? Or is the vaccine keeping those people out of the hospital?

 

[boomtube-mk2]

Has anybody done a study on what percentage of the population have contracted Covid19 and experienced virtually no symptoms at all?
These people would have developed a natural immunity but might not even know they have it.

 

[Marc_G]

My take:

Any comparison with the flu is dangerous because COVID-19-Delta is about four times as infectious as the flu so will pop up and create outbreaks even among fairly well vaxxed communities if we don't stay on top of it. And being ~10x more deadly overall, outbreaks will have real cost both in terms of personal impacts plus economic costs.

Plus the real danger of it mutating into worse strains still.

To answer Boomtube's question, I see the goal as maintaining a steady downward progression in case numbers and prevalence, and as long as communities maintain the downward progression, they should be free to have few restrictions. But where it starts flaring up, rapid reinstitution of of masking/distancing should be done.

We simply can't tolerate something with an R value of ~8 (when no restrictions are present) to hang around in our country. It can get out of control too quickly.

We need a full court press and slam this thing down hard, first here, then globally.

(Oh, and Boomtube, flu deaths recorded are not the full story. Prevalence of flu in the general population is monitored in several ways, not the least of which is percentage positive flu tests at doctor's/clinics. We know for an absolute hard fact that masking distancing and lockdowns together reduced flu prevalence by 10-20x.)

 

[Marc_G]

And now there is a new variant showing up in Florida.
Well I've got a freezer full of pizza and a pantry full of Merlot . . . I'm ready for anything!!

Sadly these "Vaccines" are more along the lines of what people get each year for "The Flu" as apposed to what we all got years ago for smallpox and polio and the like.
Henceforth, we'll all be getting our yearly "CovidXX" shots along with our yearly flu shot.
Or perhaps they'll combine them into one.

Probably