Anybody want a Corona?

[Bammer]

i know here at work if someone had covid they asked all who you were around for 15 minutes or more at one sitting. they would then email each of those people and youd be asked not to come into the office for 5 days and to take the tests. if after 5 days you tested negative you were allowed back into the office

i think i was tagged twice so far with being in close contact

14 minutes, though, and you’re in the clear. It’s science.

[JuanHamm]

They've got to draw an arbitrary line somewhere, Bammer

[Bi_3]

Medium COVID just dropped:

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/arch ... ns/671684/

[Bi_3]

While folks are clowning on the NYT for claiming COVID fatality rate is about 3%, this came up and is good data to keep in mind:

(This doesn't cover the obviously millions of cases that people did not report or in some cases even notice)

[spike]

870k deaths isn’t right either.

Also, how many of the logged cases were second or third instances of infection? You can only die once.

[Bammer]

870k deaths isn’t right either.

Also, how many of the logged cases were second or third instances of infection? You can only die once.

Is this the spike December 2022 account or the Jay Inslee April 2020 account?

[Bi_3]

800M possible infections in China over the next few months:

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandso ... us-outbrea

[Bi_3]

Some good news:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... -immunity/

Improvements in evidence show the power of naturally acquired immunity vs more boosters to mitigate the effects of the virus, which should help the debate about reimposing restrictions stay academic and not enter policy (as of 11am EST on 20.Dec.22, obviously this may change in the future).

[B]

You're comparing vaccine efficacy against someone's SECOND case of COVID.

[4/5]

You're comparing vaccine efficacy against someone's SECOND case of COVID.

Is that in the article or am I missing something in those tweets?

[B]

You're comparing vaccine efficacy against someone's SECOND case of COVID.

Is that in the article or am I missing something in those tweets?

The tweets. It says people who are vaccinated are more likely to get COVID than a person who has recovered from COVID disease.

I'd also add that it says 2 doses of COVID vaccine, not a complete series, which is more than 2 doses.

[simple schoolboy]

You're comparing vaccine efficacy against someone's SECOND case of COVID.

Is that in the article or am I missing something in those tweets?

The tweets. It says people who are vaccinated are more likely to get COVID than a person who has recovered from COVID disease.

I'd also add that it says 2 doses of COVID vaccine, not a complete series, which is more than 2 doses.

Is a complete series every 3 months until death?

[Bi_3]

Full article:

A compromise on the military covid vaccine mandate
By Leana S. Wen
Contributing columnist
December 18, 2022 at 8:00 a.m. EST


Many readers vehemently disagreed with my recent column in favor of ending the coronavirus vaccine mandate for the military. As they argue, there is a key difference between the military and everyone else: Force readiness is a matter of national security, and even a small reduction in infection or severe disease is worth a mandate.

This is an excellent point and has led me to partially reconsider my position. There might be a compromise: Keep the mandate in place but create an opt-out for those who have already contracted covid-19.

In a way, this debate is somewhat moot. On Thursday, the Senate voted 83-11 in favor of reauthorizing the defense budget, which includes repealing the vaccine mandate. So, whether the Pentagon likes it or not, it is almost certainly going away.

Nevertheless, I hope my proposed compromise might change how people think about coronavirus vaccines. It’s crucial to discuss immunity from infection, because abundant research shows natural immunity conveys excellent protection against covid. One Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study found that vaccinated people who never had covid were at least three times as likely to be infected as unvaccinated people with prior infection. And a Lancet study found that those who were vaccinated but never had covid were four times as likely to have severe illness resulting in hospitalization or death compared to the unvaccinated who recovered from it.

Protection from natural immunity also wanes at a slower rate than from vaccination. A recent large Israeli study published in the New England Journal of Medicine compared two groups of people: one that had been vaccinated and never had covid before, and another that never received vaccines but had recently recovered from covid. The results are striking: Two months after their shots, members of the first group had twice the number of infections as the second. And after six months, the first group’s infection rate was nearly three times higher than the second’s.

An updated booster dose could temporarily increase effectiveness, but the Pentagon doesn’t require it. The existing mandate is for the first two doses, which most service members probably received a year and a half ago. If that’s all those individuals received, they are almost certainly less protected from covid than people who have had the virus.

Which is most of the unvaccinated. According to a CDC analysis, more than 90 percent of adolescents have contracted the virus. Of the estimated 8,000 troops who have been discharged for not being vaccinated against covid, the vast majority probably have recovered from the coronavirus and have better protection than those never infected and who received the two required inoculations, but who are allowed to continue serving.

To be clear, vaccination is still a much safer way to develop immunity. I would never encourage “chickenpox parties” for covid. (In fact, I’ve explicitly warned against people intentionally exposing themselves.) But that doesn’t mean we should deny the existence of natural immunity. If the goal is to ensure a high level of protection among troops, then test for prior infection. There is precedent for this; recruits can be exempt from getting chickenpox and measles vaccines if a blood test demonstrates they have recovered from those illnesses.

Still, some critics will ask why there should be an opt-out. What’s the downside of requiring everyone to be vaccinated? And while we’re at it, if boosters provide some temporary protection against infection, why not do as some readers suggested and boost all the troops every three months?

Besides the logistical difficulty of such frequent inoculations, we need to be upfront that nearly every intervention has some risk, and the coronavirus vaccine is no different. The most significant risk is myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, which is most common in young men. The CDC cites a rate of 39 myocarditis cases per 1 million second doses given in males 18 to 24. Some studies found a much higher rate; a large Canadian database reported that among men ages 18 to 29 who received the second dose of the Moderna vaccine, the rate of myocarditis was 22 for every 100,000 doses.

While most cases of vaccine-associated myocarditis resolve without long-term consequences, some individuals become very ill and require intensive care. In mild cases, the heart muscle can take months to heal. Those arguing in favor of mandates because they keep the military operational must acknowledge that coronavirus vaccine side effects can sideline service members, too.

That’s why, at this point in the pandemic, the coronavirus vaccination should not be a one-size-fits-all recommendation. There are those, such as the elderly, who are clearly better protected with regular boosters. Young, generally healthy people who have never been infected with covid would probably benefit from the first two shots. For this group, I could understand a requirement for the military.

But for those with documented prior infection, I’m not convinced that the mandate makes them — or others around them — any safer. And that’s why, despite all the anger from both sides, repealing the mandate would make little difference in the battle against covid or the force readiness of our troops.

This seems like a rational approach to balance competing interests.

[B]

You're comparing vaccine efficacy against someone's SECOND case of COVID.

Is that in the article or am I missing something in those tweets?

The tweets. It says people who are vaccinated are more likely to get COVID than a person who has recovered from COVID disease.

I'd also add that it says 2 doses of COVID vaccine, not a complete series, which is more than 2 doses.

Is a complete series every 3 months until death?

A completed series depends on which vaccine you get, how old you are, and what underlying conditions you have, but for a healthy adult, it is currently a primary series, plus either one or two boosters depending on which formulation your first booster was. So, between 2 and 4 doses.

[B]

I have no problem with this, but titers are generally much more expensive than vaccine. Schools and military shouldn't bear that additional cost.

To be clear, vaccination is still a much safer way to develop immunity. I would never encourage “chickenpox parties” for covid. (In fact, I’ve explicitly warned against people intentionally exposing themselves.) But that doesn’t mean we should deny the existence of natural immunity. If the goal is to ensure a high level of protection among troops, then test for prior infection. There is precedent for this; recruits can be exempt from getting chickenpox and measles vaccines if a blood test demonstrates they have recovered from those illnesses.

[spike]

Some good news:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... -immunity/

Improvements in evidence show the power of naturally acquired immunity vs more boosters to mitigate the effects of the virus, which should help the debate about reimposing restrictions stay academic and not enter policy (as of 11am EST on 20.Dec.22, obviously this may change in the future).

people who survived covid already were more likely to survive covid? what insight!

still banging the vaccines don't work because they don't halt infection entirely drum nearly two years later? why can't anti-vaxxers wrap their head around this?

[Bammer]

Oh hey what’s up, covid guys?

[Bi_3]

Oh hey what’s up, covid guys?

So glad you asked!


The combination of China's low efficacy vaccines and their zero-COVID 'fuck 'em, weld the doors shut' policy has created a situation where there is very little immunity in the population. As their economy is barreling towards a cliff in 2023 they've opened up too fast and now it looks like they could hit >1M deaths by spring and likely spawn new variants of concern. Naturally we are going to make the same mistake as last time and not limit travel there while this is happening.

Globally a non-issue right now.

On the home front, things are obviously nearly back to 2019. Trending better than the previous two winters (for COVID) despite the low uptake of the bivalent vaccine booster... which is likely to never get the momentum now the midterms are over and the thought leaders can shift talk from 'vax über alles' to 'what are you talking about, we've always supported natural immunity as a mediation for mandates and been very clear that there are measurable cardiovascular risks to young people you ignorant mommy bloggers' as Dr. Wen does above. If it got as far as the WaPo, I'm hopeful only the suicide blues of Cali/Portland/Seattle/Mass/Maryland will consider requiring more clot-shots for children. Most folks have forgotten the more deadly variants and only know Omicron, so the fear is gone and only the struggles with their identity as "pro-vax" remains. It's gonna be hard for public health to let go of their authority but with Fauci gone they lost their icon.

[spike]

Where’s all the evidence that the vaccine is bad for you, Bi_3? Why spend anymore energy on this?

[B]

Where’s all the evidence that the vaccine is bad for you, Bi_3? Why spend anymore energy on this?