Vaccine Side Effect Legal Immunity

[pmward]

I'm totally against forcing people to take it. Incentivizing with something like a tax credit for those who take it maybe. But forcing no. I don't think it will come to that. I just don't see the government forcing people to take it. And if they do try, I'll be angry right along with you.

What I don't understand about the right though, and perhaps you can help me understand this. It just seems like the only option the right is willing to accept is a darwinist survival of the fittest. They seem unwilling to do anything to try to fix or reduce the spread. The push back against wearing masks, social distancing, taking a vaccine, and pretty much push back against doing anything at all other than just straight up Darwinism. I just don't get the angry refusal to do anything at all. It's not even about government, the right doesn't seem to be "pro-choice" on the matter they seem to be anti-do anything on the matter.

[pmward]

What I don't understand about the right though, and perhaps you can help me understand this. It just seems like the only option the right is willing to accept is a darwinist survival of the fittest. They seem unwilling to do anything to try to fix or reduce the spread. The push back against wearing masks, social distancing, taking a vaccine, and pretty much push back against doing anything at all other than just straight up Darwinism. I just don't get the angry refusal to do anything at all. It's not even about government, the right doesn't seem to be "pro-choice" on the matter they seem to be anti-do anything on the matter.

Your perception is that I’m pro-Darwinism if I am anti-mask and anti-vaccine. The reality is quite different.

I’m actually trained in proper use of PPE. That’s not to say much, the training is a few minutes long. I have taken classes in microbiology. I have worn PPE professionally in a healthcare setting.

The current state of mask use is appalling to me. It’s the equivalent of if you went to a third world country and went to a shanty hospital and a surgeon spit on his hands and wiped them on his pants prior to performing a procedure.

Re-using the same mask is silly and dangerous. Touching the mask with ungloved hands is dangerous. I see people walking around with latex gloves touching everything, their car door, their shopping cart, etc. at that point they might as well not be wearing gloves at all.

Most of the masks in use aren’t N95s. So what are they doing exactly? Can anyone show me the science that mask use stops the spread of covid? I don’t mean show me scientists, I mean show me the science. Not the person who has done science in the past on other things. Show me the actual science. Because it hasn’t been done and no IRB would approve it. If you have to google IRB then you don’t understand how science works in 2020.

The vaccine is even worse. The Pfizer study had 200 participants.

200 people.

95% effective

In 200 people.

20k people got the vaccine, so we know the side effect potential. Which is about 50% getting severe symptoms. But better half the people get severe symptoms than 0.04% die, right?

Assuming the vaccine actually works to prevent death. But we don’t know, because only 200 participants were tested.

Of the 40k trial members, half got the vaccine, half got the placebo. But only 200 of the 40k got COVID.

They weren’t exposing trial members to covid, they gave the shot and said go home, and come back if you feel really sick, and we’ll test you for covid then. And only 200 came back.

Well of those 200 who came back, only 5% of that group got the vaccine, so it’s 95% effective, in 200 people.

Although I could say of the 190 placebo group participants who got covid, there was 19810 placebo members who didn’t get covid. So perhaps I’ll get a placebo vaccine, which will keep me from getting covid 99% of the time, with zero side effects. Versus the actual vaccine, which pushes that up from 99% to 99.9% but 50% of the time you develop severe side effects.

But, since 99% of the placebo group didn’t get covid over the 6 month period, maybe covid is all bullshit and shutting down the country is bullshit. Maybe of the millions of covid deaths, most of those people would have died anyone from a different cause in 2020 because the average age of a covid death is older than the average age people live.

Maybe, the “far right” is pushing back against masks and vaccines and shutdowns because they’re complete bullshit, fighting a non-problem, and the costs of these measures is astronomical in terms of economic destruction and additional suicides from young people depressed about social isolation and economic problems caused by shutdowns.

Do you have a source for the "50% getting severe symptoms" thing. The data I've looked at showed that being mild symptoms. Like the most common side effect if I recall offhand correctly was a feeing of fatigue for a day or two after. There were very few people reporting "severe symptoms".

If you don't want to take the vaccine I respect that. I do agree with your argument that the "90% success rate" statistic that is rattled off all the time is likely a bit of a stretch for the very reasons you mention. But with the data in hand at the moment I personally would take it today if I could. By the time I'm able to take it, which is likely next summer at the earliest, I think we will also have much better data on the vaccine's efficacy and side effects. I also think it's silly though to try to convince other people to not take it. Leaving it to people to decide for themselves is one thing. Telling people to not wear a mask or take a vaccine is another. I also would be remiss if I did not point out that this is an authoritarian view.

I also think it makes no sense to both argue that we should not shut down AND that nobody should take the 2 precautions that prevent shut down, that being masks and vaccine. It just seems too inflexible of a view to me.

[glennds]

What I don't understand about the right though, and perhaps you can help me understand this. It just seems like the only option the right is willing to accept is a darwinist survival of the fittest. They seem unwilling to do anything to try to fix or reduce the spread. The push back against wearing masks, social distancing, taking a vaccine, and pretty much push back against doing anything at all other than just straight up Darwinism. I just don't get the angry refusal to do anything at all. It's not even about government, the right doesn't seem to be "pro-choice" on the matter they seem to be anti-do anything on the matter.

Your perception is that I’m pro-Darwinism if I am anti-mask and anti-vaccine. The reality is quite different.

I’m actually trained in proper use of PPE. That’s not to say much, the training is a few minutes long. I have taken classes in microbiology. I have worn PPE professionally in a healthcare setting.

The current state of mask use is appalling to me. It’s the equivalent of if you went to a third world country and went to a shanty hospital and a surgeon spit on his hands and wiped them on his pants prior to performing a procedure.

Re-using the same mask is silly and dangerous. Touching the mask with ungloved hands is dangerous. I see people walking around with latex gloves touching everything, their car door, their shopping cart, etc. at that point they might as well not be wearing gloves at all.

Most of the masks in use aren’t N95s. So what are they doing exactly? Can anyone show me the science that mask use stops the spread of covid? I don’t mean show me scientists, I mean show me the science. Not the person who has done science in the past on other things. Show me the actual science. Because it hasn’t been done and no IRB would approve it. If you have to google IRB then you don’t understand how science works in 2020.

The vaccine is even worse. The Pfizer study had 200 participants.

200 people.

95% effective

In 200 people.

20k people got the vaccine, so we know the side effect potential. Which is about 50% getting severe symptoms. But better half the people get severe symptoms than 0.04% die, right?

Assuming the vaccine actually works to prevent death. But we don’t know, because only 200 participants were tested.

Of the 40k trial members, half got the vaccine, half got the placebo. But only 200 of the 40k got COVID.

They weren’t exposing trial members to covid, they gave the shot and said go home, and come back if you feel really sick, and we’ll test you for covid then. And only 200 came back.

Well of those 200 who came back, only 5% of that group got the vaccine, so it’s 95% effective, in 200 people.

Although I could say of the 190 placebo group participants who got covid, there was 19810 placebo members who didn’t get covid. So perhaps I’ll get a placebo vaccine, which will keep me from getting covid 99% of the time, with zero side effects. Versus the actual vaccine, which pushes that up from 99% to 99.9% but 50% of the time you develop severe side effects.

But, since 99% of the placebo group didn’t get covid over the 6 month period, maybe covid is all bullshit and shutting down the country is bullshit. Maybe of the millions of covid deaths, most of those people would have died anyone from a different cause in 2020 because the average age of a covid death is older than the average age people live.

Maybe, the “far right” is pushing back against masks and vaccines and shutdowns because they’re complete bullshit, fighting a non-problem, and the costs of these measures is astronomical in terms of economic destruction and additional suicides from young people depressed about social isolation and economic problems caused by shutdowns.

This is a pretty clear outline of your critiques.
What would you suggest as a strategy for controlling or stopping the spread of the virus given these deficiencies in the vaccines, masks and shutdowns?

Please don't say do nothing, let it run. In my market, the hospital system is becoming totally overloaded, 8% capacity left in the statewide ICU licensed bed count. They are predicting hitting capacity in about two weeks after which there is a question of how patients who need a hospital bed will get one. A friend of mine comes from a small town in Indiana. His brother came down with a bad case of Covid, presented himself at the local ER, but the hospital could not accommodate him. They sent him home to try and convalesce with oral medications. A home health nurse showed up the next day and started an IV, but his family is beyond stressed out because his breathing is compromised, and he really needs to be in a hospital.

[SomeDude]

Also, here’s a video of a Tennessee nurse, one of the first people to get the vaccine this week, passing out on camera, minutes after getting the vaccine, while talking about how great the vaccine is.

I saw that this morning. I'm thinking she passed out because of how great it is.

[SomeDude]

But better half the people get severe symptoms than 0.04% die, right?

I think they're saying that even if you get multiple "vaccine" doses, you still need to socially distance and wear masks and the economy needs to shut down.

Therefore the equation is - 100% of people's lives ruined + 50% with severe symptoms > .04% (mostly sick elderly) die

[Mark Leavy]

Put me down as "pro Darwinism".

I don't understand the argument that if you don't want the vaccine, you are being selfish and putting other people's lives at risk.

Wouldn't the only people with lives at risk be the ones that elected not to get vaccinated - and therefore explicitly embraced that risk?

Why make it mandatory for anyone that didn't want it? I suppose it would be reasonable to forfeit any right to publicly funded healthcare if you don't want the vaccine, but I don't understand how it would be endangering to any of the model citizens that went along with the vaccination program.

[glennds]

Put me down as "pro Darwinism".

I don't understand the argument that if you don't want the vaccine, you are being selfish and putting other people's lives at risk.

Wouldn't the only people with lives at risk be the ones that elected not to get vaccinated - and therefore explicitly embraced that risk?

Why make it mandatory for anyone that didn't want it? I suppose it would be reasonable to forfeit any right to publicly funded healthcare if you don't want the vaccine, but I don't understand how it would be endangering to any of the model citizens that went along with the vaccination program.

Agreed. And I'm still looking for a link or a citation to whomever is suggesting that the vaccine be mandatory. Anyone who knows, please share.

I have heard ideas floated about offering compensation of some sort for getting the vaccine, a carrot as opposed to a stick. If you don't want it, don't get it, and you don't get the carrot. I've also heard that some insurance companies may increase premiums for those that don't get it (or reduce premiums for those that do), kind of like how they treat smokers. I have also heard speculation that foreign countries may require vaccination for a time, as a condition of visa.

I hear push back about the vaccine being mandatory, but again, I am not able to find anyone actually proposing it.

[pmward]

Put me down as "pro Darwinism".

I don't understand the argument that if you don't want the vaccine, you are being selfish and putting other people's lives at risk.

Wouldn't the only people with lives at risk be the ones that elected not to get vaccinated - and therefore explicitly embraced that risk?

Why make it mandatory for anyone that didn't want it? I suppose it would be reasonable to forfeit any right to publicly funded healthcare if you don't want the vaccine, but I don't understand how it would be endangering to any of the model citizens that went along with the vaccination program.

I don't think I've seen anybody here say that people should be forced to take the vaccine. I think it's safe to say that we are all in agreement on that (for once). So I wouldn't put your view in the "Darwinism" category. The "Darwinism" category is more inline with Tom's auth-right view, that nobody should do anything or change their behaviors in any way to prevent or fight the virus. That we should let the people that are gonna die die, and the rest of us will continue on like nothing happened.

[Cortopassi]

But better half the people get severe symptoms than 0.04% die, right?

I think they're saying that even if you get multiple "vaccine" doses, you still need to socially distance and wear masks and the economy needs to shut down.

Therefore the equation is - 100% of people's lives ruined + 50% with severe symptoms > .04% (mostly sick elderly) die

"I think they're saying..." from what source?

It's one thing to not like the way things are playing out. It's another to basically say the same restrictions are going to happen even after a vaccine. They are not. Why do you make those statements?

Here's some questions and answers posed to Fauci and others. Is it, a "Yee Hah, we are open on Jan 1 statement?" No. Is it a we'll pretty much get back to normal sometime next year? That's how I read it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/16/well ... covid.html

[Tortoise]

A virus so deadly you have to be tested to know if you've been infected...

A vaccine so beneficial that a tax credit is needed to incentivize its use...

[pmward]

Put me down as "pro Darwinism".

I don't understand the argument that if you don't want the vaccine, you are being selfish and putting other people's lives at risk.

Wouldn't the only people with lives at risk be the ones that elected not to get vaccinated - and therefore explicitly embraced that risk?

Why make it mandatory for anyone that didn't want it? I suppose it would be reasonable to forfeit any right to publicly funded healthcare if you don't want the vaccine, but I don't understand how it would be endangering to any of the model citizens that went along with the vaccination program.

I don't think I've seen anybody here say that people should be forced to take the vaccine. I think it's safe to say that we are all in agreement on that (for once). So I wouldn't put your view in the "Darwinism" category. The "Darwinism" category is more inline with Tom's auth-right view, that nobody should do anything or change their behaviors in any way to prevent or fight the virus. That we should let the people that are gonna die die, and the rest of us will continue on like nothing happened.

Since you are so fond of pressing for answers to questions you have posed that get 'ignored', I'm going to ask again to please define in your own terms (not Google's) what you mean by this term, and how it differs from when you use Alt-right.

Auth-right is exactly what it sounds... authoritarian right. I would consider Trump an auth-right leader. Tom is not auth-right in all his views, but on this specific view he is advocating an authoritarian view that nobody should do anything about the coronavirus and trying to do any preventative measure at all, including something as easy as choosing to wear a mask, is harmful. He is not pro-choice, he is against anybody doing anything to try to prevent or slow the pandemic down. What comes to mind is the type of person that would pester anyone he saw in public wearing a mask. The spreaders of this view tend to feel they are somehow superior to anybody that does anything to prevent the virus. This is an auth-right view.

When I use the term alt-right I'm more referring to the right wing tin-foil hat conspiracy theory crowd, white supremecist groups, etc. Basically white wing extremists. Qanon and proud boys would be examples of what I would call alt-right. The auth view may or may not be present in these groups.

[sophie]

We finally got a formal statement from my university/hospital: the vaccine won't be mandatory. "For now." But, they touted it as all benefit no risk, even to people with a history of severe allergic reactions. (Which btw includes me.)

One interesting bit of info I learned: the vaccine apparently is only good for 2 months of protection, even after two doses - indicating you may need more than just one booster. Sounds delightful, especially if the side effects worsen with each shot.

Not liking this vaccine too much right now....very happy to hang back and wait to see how it goes for the people clamoring to get one.

[pmward]

We finally got a formal statement from my university/hospital: the vaccine won't be mandatory. "For now." But, they touted it as all benefit no risk, even to people with a history of severe allergic reactions. (Which btw includes me.)

One interesting bit of info I learned: the vaccine apparently is only good for 2 months of protection, even after two doses - indicating you may need more than just one booster. Sounds delightful, especially if the side effects worsen with each shot.

Not liking this vaccine too much right now....very happy to hang back and wait to see how it goes for the people clamoring to get one.

That 2 month info is good to know, thanks for sharing. I had heard it might have limited immunity, but I figured maybe a once a year booster or something. 2 months is kind of crazy.

[SomeDude]

1608186895138-e1608202185348.jpg (56.74 KiB) Viewed 6137 times

[pp4me]

What would you suggest as a strategy for controlling or stopping the spread of the virus given these deficiencies in the vaccines, masks and shutdowns?

Please don't say do nothing, let it run. In my market, the hospital system is becoming totally overloaded, 8% capacity left in the statewide ICU licensed bed count.

How about prayer? I'm not saying to any specific diety, pick your favorite. Or create your own.

I think prayer has a similar effectiveness to preventing COVID as wearing reusable cotton masks and shutting down businesses. Prayer is cheaper, doesn't require enhanced unemployment benefits.

Religous leaders all say prayer is very effective at reducing COVID spread.

Half the country believes prayer is effective against COVID. And we have to do something, right? So why not make it mandatory that every prays everyday before entering a store or public place. Look, I'm not saying you actually have to believe the prayer works. I'm just saying you have to do it. Because ICU beds are at capacity and we have to do something.

I was in the car with an 8 year old kid a while ago and he asked that very question of his church-going mother who was my wife's niece. He wanted to know why we just couldn't get everybody in the world to pray to God to make it go away.

That boy was very smart and you could ask him the name of the capital of every state in the U.S. and most of the countries in the world and he could answer you instantly.

So I asked him why it wouldn't work the same if just one person asked if it is true that God hears our prayers.

His mother, seeing that I was an emissary of Satan, cut the conversation off quickly by giving him the answer that "it's all about faith".

Not wanting to cause any further damage to his faith I didn't say anything more but I'm guessing he already saw that verse in the Bible about being able to cast a mountain into the sea by speaking to it if you only have faith as a mustard seed. There is also a verse about the requirement of two people agreeing in prayer but I'm not aware of any verse that says you need more than that to get God to do something.

Given that boy's intelligence I'm hopeful that he will eventually realize the cognitive dissonance of believing that there is a God who answers prayer and won't fall for the the theological B.S. about why those Bible verses and others don't mean what they actually say. Hopefully he won't waste as much time on religion as I did.

[SomeDude]

Man i just got back from taco bell and there were 65 kajillion bazillion bodies in the road.

I am calling on the office of the President elect to immediately institute mandatory prayer to Moloch to save us.

Tax credits if you sacrifice a baby or fetus. We must destroy everyone's life to prevent a tiny portion of sick elderly from getting the flu.

[Mark Leavy]

Given that boy's intelligence I'm hopeful that he will eventually realize the cognitive dissonance of believing that there is a God who answers prayer and won't fall for the the theological B.S. about why those Bible verses and others don't mean what they actually say. Hopefully he won't waste as much time on religion as I did.

The boy sounds bright, pp4me. I'm sure that he will figure out that individual prayer effectiveness is within one standard deviation of individual masks.

[sophie]

Please don't say do nothing, let it run. In my market, the hospital system is becoming totally overloaded, 8% capacity left in the statewide ICU licensed bed count.

Glenn, you have to put on the hat of a hospital administrator to understand why 8% ICU capacity in winter is NORMAL.

Every year, winter respiratory illnesses result in hospitals being flooded with sick people. They are the usual suspects: the unhealthy, the very old, the nursing home patients. It is absolutely, 100% normal for hospitals to hit capacity every winter. My own hospital sends out "Surge Alerts" when that happens. They go on ER bypass, which means ambulances have to take people somewhere else and the ER only accepts walkins. This happens for usually several weeks, most often in January and February but sometimes starting in December. (If memory serves, it's December now.) Of note, a hospital with 8% empty beds (92% capacity) will not be sending out Surge Alerts. That requires something like 98-99% capacity.

So if it happens every year, why don't the hospitals add capacity so it doesn't happen? Simple: they WANT this to happen every year. An empty bed is a bucket of money being poured out the window. Hospital administrators don't like empty beds. If there is spare capacity, they reduce beds. They turn double rooms into single rooms, remake parts of the hospital into outpatient centers, fancy conference centers, or what have you. Anything that will make more money than an empty bed.

So in short, what the newspapers are breathlessly reporting as "The hospitals are filling up!" is....business as usual. If you need a reason to be frightened of COVID, sorry but you'll have to look elsewhere.

[SomeDude]

If you need a reason to be frightened of COVID, sorry but you'll have to look elsewhere.

You should just look out the window at the bodies stacked on top of each other. There are so many vacant homes in my town due to mass death that housing prices are only going up 9-10% each year.

It's basically Gettysburg meets the Somme meets Hiroshima out here. No one has ever seen a pandemic like this before where no one knows anyone who knows anyone who's died from it.

A pandemic like that where we know kajillions are dying because CNN said so but no one knows any of their names is truly so scary, that you can get people to give their most basic rights to stop it.

But, as a wise man once said, we've got to be forced to do something, there's not enough empty hospital beds to go around.

[vnatale]

Please don't say do nothing, let it run. In my market, the hospital system is becoming totally overloaded, 8% capacity left in the statewide ICU licensed bed count.

It is absolutely, 100% normal for hospitals to hit capacity every winter. My own hospital sends out "Surge Alerts" when that happens. They go on ER bypass, which means ambulances have to take people somewhere else and the ER only accepts walkins.

I’ve worked at two dozen hospitals in the last decade. Most of them had their EDs go on bypass a few times per week. All year round. Pre-Covid.

The equivalent would be if the media wanted to pump up the idea of space travel as an imperative for society and started reporting on how the sun has been rising every morning for three weeks straight! The sun comes up every morning for the last 3 weeks!

We have to do something!

What are "EDs"?

Vinny

[glennds]

Please don't say do nothing, let it run. In my market, the hospital system is becoming totally overloaded, 8% capacity left in the statewide ICU licensed bed count.

Glenn, you have to put on the hat of a hospital administrator to understand why 8% ICU capacity in winter is NORMAL.
....


So in short, what the newspapers are breathlessly reporting as "The hospitals are filling up!" is....business as usual. If you need a reason to be frightened of COVID, sorry but you'll have to look elsewhere.

Sophie,
As coincidence would have it, I AM a hospital administrator, or at least a former hospital administrator as of six years ago, and a hospital CFO before that, approximately 22 years of inpatient administration experience in all. In two states. I understand completely the point you are trying to make. Yes, in our market it is not uncommon in the busy season to have one or more hospitals intermittently on surge alert (we call it divert, meaning incoming ED patients are triage diverted to another hospital).

This said, what is going on right now is NOT normal. I have enough connections among former co-workers, attending physicians, consulting specialists and friends to have a window into how abnormal what is happening on the floors is right now. It is a legitimate public health infectious disease crisis.
I do agree that there is a layer of sensationalism that the mainstream news is adding. But the media has been partially enabled in this regard by the vacuum of clear messaging and leadership from the Federal government and most state governments, which is a completely separate problem.

But to suggest business as usual and nothing to see here is an equally great disservice in the opposite direction. There is a legitimate cause for concern and people who are vulnerable, or people who may be a pathway to those who are vulnerable should be taking precautions seriously.

I can understand where you might not agree with the politics of the situation or the public health response. But as a clinician, whether you provide direct patient care or not, I would hope the recommendations to patients to err to the side of safety would have your support.

[glennds]

Please don't say do nothing, let it run. In my market, the hospital system is becoming totally overloaded, 8% capacity left in the statewide ICU licensed bed count.

It is absolutely, 100% normal for hospitals to hit capacity every winter. My own hospital sends out "Surge Alerts" when that happens. They go on ER bypass, which means ambulances have to take people somewhere else and the ER only accepts walkins.

I’ve worked at two dozen hospitals in the last decade. Most of them had their EDs go on bypass a few times per week. All year round. Pre-Covid.

The equivalent would be if the media wanted to pump up the idea of space travel as an imperative for society and started reporting on how the sun has been rising every morning for three weeks straight! The sun comes up every morning for the last 3 weeks!

We have to do something!

If you worked at a hospital that was going on ED divert several times a week all year round, then you're working in a seriously underbedded market.

What exactly do you do? May I take a guess?
Respiratory therapist? Lab or pharmacy tech? Phlebotomy? PT, OT or Speech?

[SomeDude]

If we're guessing what TF does i would say checks prostates and maybe labels urine samples?

[SomeDude]

If we're guessing what TF does i would say checks prostates and maybe labels urine samples?

Just because I checked yours, doesn’t mean it’s within my scope of practice professionally.

Don't expect me to pay any invoice you send

[Maddy]

If you worked at a hospital that was going on ED divert several times a week all year round, then you're working in a seriously underbedded market.

What exactly do you do? May I take a guess?
Respiratory therapist? Lab or pharmacy tech? Phlebotomy? PT, OT or Speech?

Sophie is an M.D.--a neurologist.

Here we seemingly have two completely different interpretations of what an 8% remaining capacity means. Is it, or is it not, status quo for this time of year? Patient census statistics ought to resolve the question definitively one way or another.

Sophie's explanation that hospitals contract and expand their capacities to maximize profits rings absolutely true to me. Sophie has proven herself over and over to be a real stickler when it comes to the interpretation of data, so I have confidence that she's not speaking out of her ass. And I'm all too aware that we were intentionally duped on this very point earlier this year when--right here in my locale--we were led to believe that the hospitals were "overwhelmed" when in fact their censuses were so low that a few months later they were on the verge of closing.

Glennds maintains that the present situation is highly abnormal, but I see no attempt to back that position up. Glennds, what, in particular makes you conclude that the 8% statistic represents something out of the ordinary?