Where should we treat the unvaxxed?

~ The " facts & science " of Covid 19 are hidden away at the Wuhan Institute of Virology laboratory - forbidden to enter . We are learning and guessing as we go . However those few who are inclined can vist here and read the genius posted and feel educated. The rest of us will remain entertained and amused. '

 

Elderly people or people with preexisting medical conditions who are therefore at high risk of dying if they catch COVID-19, who, after a very prudent risk/benefit analysis in consultation with a trusted MD, logically conclude that it is more prudent to isolate themselves for a while rather than force mandates on young healthy people and expose themselves to hundreds of potentially infected customers at Walmart on an unwise mission to have some retarded stoned overworked sleepy child perform an invasive surgical procedure on them.

 

Not trusting a vaccine that isn't really a vaccine that doesn't give you any immunity doesn't mean not trusting doctors.

Not trusting the so-called vaccine is really not trusting the liars calling it that. Because when you call it a vaccine and it's not a vaccine that's a lie.

If you can still transmit the illness you can still get sick and even die from the illness after being "vaccinated" I got the virus from a vaccinated person. Then it isn't a vaccine that's not what that word means. At least it didn't until drug companies started pushing you this fake vaccine on us with the threat of government Force.

I don't trust lying drug companies idiot politicians that claim to be doctors and other politicians that don't.

In that group of people I don't trust doctors weren't included.

I'm sorry it's human nature not to trust liars.

 

I pay my insurance premiums. I quarantined and gave covid to nobody. I donate blood for antibody therapy and research. I've tested positive for antibodies 7 times in the past 16 months. I've delivered meals and supplies to quarantining friends. What makes you think you deserve better health care than me?

 

What makes me think it? Your choice, if you are not vaccinated. It's you who aren't choosing science. So, given that you and people like you don't trust people like me (I'm a medical doctor and a medical scientist, MD PhD, with both clinical hours for my hospital and research hours for my university), I am suggesting to you (in a humoristic manner) an alternative to get care from Google searchers and from Joe Rogan and Aaron Rodgers rather than from people like me. I didn't imply that I'd segregate you to this inferior care. I said, if you were to choose to come get my care, I'd deliver it, but maybe you'd be more comfortable getting Joe Rogan's opinion rather than mine, since you seem to trust him more than you'd trust someone like me.

[Do understand that I'm using "you" as a stand-in for anti-vaxxers and vaccine-hesitant in general; not necessarily YOU, whom I don't know].

And I think you missed the point. It is not about the care I get for me (you imply that I think I deserve better care than you, when nothing in my original post relates to the care I receive). It's about the care I deliver to people like you.

Now, more personally, I'll use you as in YOU, the poster.

Great that you helped. Thank you for donating blood for therapeutics and research, and for delivering meals to your friends. That's commendable.

Me, I helped A LOT more, and incurring A LOT MORE RISK. I voluntarily treated Covid-19 patients on an ICU and a Covid-19 unit for over one year, a good part of it being before the vaccines. So I was exposed every workday to huge loads of the virus and any little slip (say, improper use of PPE, in a moment of distraction) and I'd get contaminated. I spent blank nights taking care of severe cases, and countless hours taking care of moderate cases. I faced this risk despite being old and having multiple medical conditions (most likely, I'd have died if I had caught the virus - still, I chose to work in a place with the highest possible concentration of virus).

Why do I say voluntarily? Because I work in another unit of my hospital, non-Covid-related, and in my research lab. And I have sufficient seniority, with a fairly high administrative position in the hospital hierarchy. So there is nothing in my job description that would force me to temporarily abandon most of what I was doing before, to voluntarily help out in our short-staffed Covid unit and Covid ICU. However I am one of the doctors in my hospital with the advanced training and experience needed for emergency intubation, for calibrating a mechanical ventilator, and so on. Given that the few who also had this expertise were exhausted, I decided to step in and help. Due to my age, medical conditions, and position, I could perfectly have stayed safe in my ivory tower, allowing others to incur the risks. That was not the choice I made.

I saw even older and more frail colleagues literally coming out of retirement to help out, as well.

I'm also one of the people who produce the research projects you generously contributed to (for which, again, I thank you). That's not just helping my patients, but literally helping all humankind.

So please don't even start trying to feel all superior to me, thinking that I'm criticizing people without having helped myself. I've helped, literally putting my very life at stake.

So, seeing all this effort being laughed at by some people who think that listening to Joe Rogan about ivermectin is better than listening to me about the vaccines, with these people then crashing into my ICU, severely ill and still thinking it's all a hoax, is, to say the least, somewhat frustrating, which is why in a moment of venting this frustration, I posted the largely humoristic OP.

Still, like I said in several subsequent posts in this thread (you seem to be one of those who react in a knee-jerk to the OP without reading the whole thread - see for example post #66 above), in my real life I never addressed non-vaccinated patients in any way other than offering them the full gamut of my medical expertise and professionalism. I said so in the very first line of my OP, before I went on to the sarcastic and humoristic approach.

 

So do you think trusting natural immunity is irresponsible? Other than quarantining, I haven't missed a day of work. I've had prolonged exposure to coworkers on the day they tested positive for covid and I'm fine. I knew 2 people who died after vaccinations. One from a stroke and the other had a breakthrough case of covid. I don't see a reason to trust a vaccine that doesn't prevent a disease I've already had

 

I think we just have different perspectives. We are at about 60% vaccinated. I never expected much over 50%. That was my prediction based on knowing how a good share of the vaccine hesitant demographics make decisions on such things. Here are a few observations of mine from before vaccines were available and before I saw any serious pushback from anti vaxxers. I believe all are from around August 2020.

Of course I agree anti vaxxers have been influential in some ways. But you have to remember a lot of anti vax information is censored by media and social media. On the other hand, mis/disinformation from “official” sources is willingly widely distributed by media/social media. I would posit with such a marked advantage, if anti vax is winning it’s because of failings of strength of argument and ability to maintain public trust from official sources. To be clear, I’m not saying anti vax mis/disinformation is correct. To go to metaphor, I’m saying when a more powerful army is losing to one with less might, it’s usually due to substandard tactics on the part of the superior forces. In the above quotes from last year I pointed out tactical errors to avoid. Almost every one of those tactical errors was employed with gusto.

You know my criticism is not directed at you. You’ve been forthright on vaccines, honest about other aspects of immunity and epidemiological policy failures by public health, and you’ve acknowledged people’s right to bodily autonomy. My point is that the pro vaxxers held the high cards and folded. If the anti vaxxers take the pot it’s not because of their correctness or intelligence, but because pro vaxxers played their hand incorrectly.

Unlike the vast majority of my posts on Covid which have the backing of hard evidence, this is my (hopefully informed) opinion. I could be wrong in my perspective but it did play out how I warned it would if vaxxers played their hand incorrectly.

I would add, the ratios of willing vaccinees and anti/hesitant vaxxers was mostly baked into the cake before vaccines went to trials. Even if pro vaxxers had played their hand perfectly, they wouldn’t have converted more than 10% more than they have now. This is America where people don’t care about obesity, diabetes, accidental death, and substance abuse etc. We can’t expect them to care too much about one more way to die.

 

The Ancient Egyptians did it, called trepanning. Didn't you see The Egyptian? Probably stung a tad since they did't have anesthesia.

 

What is your doctor a doctor of? English Literature?

All vaccines have dangers, but they affect so few people that the overall hazards are vanishingly small and have been for years. The vaccines in use now were tested in the exact same way that any others are tested and the only reason they were tested faster was because the groups being tested were so very much larger than they usually are (in some cases comprising the entire population of Israel, though I am not sure of this), there is no other difference.

I will say this and your "Doctor" is free to sue me if he likes. If he is saying that the shots are "very dangerous" as a medical opinion he is a lying POS and should lose any license he once held to practice medicine.

IMO the ONLY reason not to get the "clot shot" is because you are such a devoted follower of Trump and the conspiracies of Trumpism that you STILL believe COVID to be a hoax that will just "go away" if we would all just be good Muricans and die in agony for the Greater Glory of the Bronze Deity, as you no doubt are willing to do yourself.

 

This is the blind trying to lead the blind - and proof that repeat something over and over long enough - folks will take it as Gods Truth.

In your region (call it a state if you like)

1) what is the risk of death from covid
2) what is the risk of death from the vax

If you don't know that answer to both these questions .. you have no business making any claims about the "Clot Shot"

So .. get out your calculator .. get back to me with the numbers .. or .. "ask an expert" .. such as myself . who will give you the numbers .. but no complaining after the fact .. as you could not be bothered to do the calculation.

 

I did the first one and I got an answer that it was about 30% for someone with my health if I should get COVID while unvaccinated
And under 1% for risk from the vaccine

 

'
'
Good . then go get the vax .. but we are not talking about someone with 10 comorbidities 500 lbs .. immune compromized - and a doctors note saying you have weeks to live .. which is what it would take to get the number that high.

Risk from the vax better be under 1% .. as 1% would be a massive risk of harm. Your calculation was wrong .. care to show your work ? .. Like I do - and will be happy to make corrections.

What are the numbers for someone "NOT" in group B - .. No comorbidity - Obese - pneumonia succeptibility.

 

What is digusting are those who post misinformation - wittingly or - unwittingly in your case.

Someone who has had covid unvaxed .. is not more likely to contract covid and die - than the vaxed.
Further .. someone who is unvaxed - but doesn't have comorbidities, pneumonia succeptibility, Obese - is less likely to die from covid than a vaxed Fattie with issues.

Why should healthy people risk harm to themselves because of the "willful Ignorance" of the Fauci-Biden clownshow.

 

So, after reading several threads and links what I think I have learned is whether You Are vaccinated or not you still spread the virus? So, people screaming you are killing my mom should be screaming at the vaxxed also.

 

If your ideological dogma impedes your acceptance of expert medical consensus, try to prevent it from metastasizing to other disciplines besides public health, epidemiology, and virology. If you paranoia spreads to cardiologists, oncologists, and others, and you begin looking to media entertainers in their stead as well, you may be beyond help.

The data that confirms the unvaccinated contracting, being hospitalized for, requiring intensive care for, and dying from Covid at a much higher rate than the vaccinated is overwhelming.

The crackpot nostrums of quacks are debunked by controlled studies that produce empirical data. E.g.,

"Following reports of cardiac and other adverse events in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 (2), on April 24, 2020, FDA issued a caution against its use† and on June 15, rescinded its EUA for hydroxychloroquine from the Strategic National Stockpile.§ Following the FDA’s issuance of caution and EUA rescindment, on May 12 and June 16, the federal COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel issued recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19"

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6935a4.htm

As coronavirus cases spike, the unvaccinated are most at risk of severe illness

Doctor: 'Pandemic of the unvaccinated' as COVID-19 surge overwhelms hospitals

Yes, breakthrough infections happen. But vaccination still massively decreases the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19

Understaffed hospitals struggle to deal with Covid surge among unvaccinated

87% Of Michigan’s COVID ICU Patients Unvaccinated, Hospital Association Says​

Don't be duped by fake claims by frauds! They're out there!​

Cow dung and urine passed off as wonder drugs in Covid-hit India




​

 

Coronavirus: Unvaccinated residents five times more likely to catch coronavirus​

No vaccine is 100% effective, not have any competent medical authorities ever made such a claim.

The unvaccinated contract and spread the disease at a much higher rate than the vaccinated.

Emergency room overwhelmed with unvaccinated COVID patients
​

As cases increase, hospitals like Geisinger Wyoming Valley Medical Center in Pennsylvania, are being overwhelmed.

Hospital staff at Geisinger Wyoming Valley Medical Center said they are operating at about 120% capacity with nearly a quarter of patients in the COVID unit.

Almost all the patients being treated at the hospital's emergency room are unvaccinated, emergency room physician Dr. Essie Reed said.

"The saddest thing is when they're asking when they can get the vaccine and you're just not sure if they're going to make it to that point to be able to offer it to them," said Reed.

Kyle Whiting's family said Kyle was perfectly healthy with no underlying conditions when he contracted COVID in October. He's been hospitalized ever since.

His sister believes had Whiting been vaccinated, he would have been in better shape.

"I think it would have helped him medically. I think it wouldn't have been as bad, but I couldn't say for sure if it would have prevented all this," Katelin Lillie said.

Whiting spent his 27th birthday on life support and has even missed his wedding. His lungs are no longer functioning, and he now needs a double transplant. The process for the transplant operation was delayed.

He is never going to have the same life he had," said Lillie.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/e...covid-patients/ar-AARGGdg?ocid=BingNewsSearch

​

Ignorance, whether induced by ideological dogma or otherwise, exacts a high price.

 

You continue to generalize because you have no clue what you are talking about .. posting headlines from articles you read ... but . as demonstrated previously .. have no idea what the data is telling you.

For some Unvaxed - Group B (comorb, pnumonia, obese) the risk of harm "hospitalization death" from Covid is greater than the risk of harm from taking the vax.

For those in Group A . ..the risk of harm from the vax is greater than catching "Delta" .. and much higher it appears w/r to Omicron ..

For those in Group A + (natural immunity) .. the risk of harm from the vax is way way higher.

So your claim is correct .. but only for people in Group B .. so keep your filthy paws .. of my silky draw's

 

Yes, it is irresponsible, given several studies showing that the population that had Covid-19 dramatically improved the odds of not catching it a second time if they have at least one dose of the vaccine. Yes, it is irresponsible to look at data not from a scientific point, but based on anecdotal evidence of two people you know. Yes, it is irresponsible to attribute to the vaccine, in case the person who had the stroke took an mRNA vaccine, a side effect that it practically doesn't cause (exceedingly rare, to the order of 1 in several million with the mRNA vaccines, although if the person took the J&J then it's a bit more than that); correlation is not causation; the odds are overwhelming that the person would have had the stroke regardless of the vaccine and it was not the vaccine that caused it. I know that if you do know a person and it happened in this sequence, it is very hard to not think it was the vaccine, but the thing is, if you look at studies of stroke incidence in the general population, the vaccine does not increase it (again, I'm talking about the mRNA vaccines; the adenovirus vector vaccines such as the J&J and the AstraZeneca are a bit different for that). See, the vaccines have been given to a huge number of more than 7 billion doses worldwide, with no bump in incidence of stroke. So, these vaccines protect against Covid-19. They don't protect against stroke, heart disease, whatever other disease people continue to have and die from, but it is common for those who oppose the vaccine to think that it was the vaccine, when a vaccinated person happens to die of a disease the person would have had anyway, when it happens shortly after the vaccine.

Yes, it is irresponsible to think that if one person had a breakthrough fatal infection, it means that the vaccine doesn't prevent the disease for most people, because you don't know what made this person not respond to the vaccine. Maybe this person had a condition that knocked down the vaccine's efficacy (I could go on and on and mention the various possibilities) that do not apply to you. Science is not made of anecdotal evidence. We do know that these cases are out there, and if you coincidentally know one case, it doesn't mean that they aren't exceedingly rare, and it doesn't mean that the VAST majority of vaccinated people will not experience the bad outcome this one person had.

Look, my interest in talking to you about this is not one of sticking it to you and winning an Internet debate, although my patience varies with how frustrated I am at a given particular moment. If you follow my posting here, I've posted numerous times more gently and more respectfully, so I'll now apologize to you if I addressed you in a harsh manner. We can move on from the adversarial tone and substitute "not the most evidence-supported attitude" for "irresponsible." Since my registration here, I said in my newbie presentation that my main goal posting here was to continue a bit my mission in life, that of alleviating pain and suffering, to my leisure time; I'd be glad to explain the science in terms that non-scientists can better absorb, advocate for certain health-promoting actions, and combat misinformation and conspiracy theories about Covid-19, its prevention and treatment. And yes, it's good for me too, to vent frustration from time to time (better to vent it here than with my real-life patients) and I do like to debate political issues from time to time (the bulk of my posting has been on Covid-19 given the pandemic, but I do post about politics, about TV shows, etc.).

So, my main goal is not to win this debate with you, but to be helpful. Look, you seem to have survived just fine a bout with mild or asymptomatic Covid-19 and I'm glad that you did. However, the way the science about this terrible disease has evolved, is that it is not really a respiratory disease, but actually an endothelial and inflammatory disease. What it means, is that the virus directly attacks the inner layer of blood vessels, which can and does affect multiple organs, even in mild and asymptomatic cases, as shown for example by finding 45.8% of healthy college athletes (you can't find a population to study any healthier than college athletes) having had heart compromise after a bout of mild or asymptomatic Covid-19, in a study from Ohio State University that I quoted here with a link several times, and which has been confirmed by similar findings in other studies, including one from Frankfurt that found an even bigger whooping rate of 74%, although others found smaller numbers. Regardless of the number, a significant percentage of healthy and young people can come out of mild or asymptomatic Covid-19 with lesions in one or more of the major organs. Another study showed that more than 50% of Covid-19 survivors show at least one organ damage. This terrible disease affects the heart (myocarditis, pericarditis), the brain (strokes, brain fog), the liver (liver insufficiency), the kidneys (renal insufficiency), the lungs (fibrosis), the pancreas (beta pancreatic cells leading to new onset diabetes), the coagulation system (strokes - HUGE risk, much more from the virus itself than from the vaccines; pulmonary embolism), and so on. Why? Because the endothelium of small vessels is everywhere in your body, and is essential to the good functioning of all organs. Also, there is the inflammatory part that affects joints, muscles, the brain, the heart, etc.; Covid-19 tends to induce an overdrive of the immune system that turns detrimental. The virus has 29 proteins and it throws billions, trillions of copies into your body everywhere. The vaccines have 1 of the 29 proteins, in transient and small amount; whatever you think the vaccine may cause, the virus will cause literally thousands, hundreds of thousands of times more frequently and more intensely.

That's why you DON'T want a second bout of Covid-19. Damage accumulates. If you had a mild case, and luck you, very mild damage that is not even visible now in symptoms or tests, a second bout could add to it. The drama with this virus is not just its low death rate. It's rather its huge ability to cause organ damage. You don't want to have one of the organs or more than one damaged for the rest of your life.

So, you have natural immunity. Sure, good for you. Unfortunately the newest variant, Omicron, is known to bypassing that and to have a high ability to re-infect people who had Covid-19 before, from an earlier strain. It bypasses two doses of the vaccine too. But it gets curbed by 2 doses and a booster, or by two doses from those who had Covid-19 before (the natural disease functioning as the first one of the three stimulations of the defenses). So, particularly now that Omicron is coming, it would be wise for you to take two doses of an mRNA vaccine. You'd better avoid the odds of having a second bout of Covid-19 that could add to whatever small organ damage you may have silently collected from your first bout.

And no, the odds that you'll die of stroke if you do that (especially with an mRNA vaccine) are so tiny, to the point of being for all practical purposes, zero, unlike the virus' HUGE propensity to cause strokes in survivors. You are MUCH more protected against a stroke if you take the vaccine than if you just rely on natural immunity and you acquire the virus again. The odds that you will have a fatal breakthrough infection are even lower in my opinion, because you've shown already the capacity to make good antibody titers from the natural infection so there is no reason to think that you wouldn't boost that (in studies, 45 times higher titles) with the vaccine.

I sincerely hope that the above is helpful. If you have other reasons to be hesitant about the vaccine and want to ask me questions about it, I'll be more than happy to respond. Have a nice day.

 

Widespread immunization is, necessarily, the general societal policy, as it was with smallpox, polio, etc.

Our democratic government has a responsibility to the welfare of all.

Concern for one's loved ones, neighbors, and fellow citizens, as well as sympathy for healthcare providers, is responsible as well as patriotic, and immunization is a proven expression of those values.

Apparently, you do not attempt to deny the overwhelming empirical data that confirms that the unvaccinated contract, are hospitalized for, require intensive care for, and die from Covid at a much higher rate than the vaccinated.

 

I can’t agree with this. To racist

 

Remarkable post, and one that got me thinking and opened my eyes to a different perspective. And here I was, thinking that I had all the tools and knew everything about it, and again, you introduce something I hadn't thought of. It is not for nothing that you're one of my favorite posters. The one thing I'd think a bit differently than what you just said (so, I agree 99%) is, natural immunity is failing too, and more and more studies are showing that those who have already had Covid-19 are better off if they get at least one dose of the vaccine, two if they want to be protected against Omicron; its ability to re-infect preliminarily looks to be huge, which as you know defeats herd immunity. So yes, a combination of natural immunity and vaccine immunity is ideal, but not necessarily the way you were thinking before, with a percentage of people achieving immunity through declining to take the vaccine but acquiring Covid-19, and a percentage of people achieving immunity through the vaccine. That was possible when the vaccine was more efficacious before Delta and now Omicron, and when reinfection was less likely given that the main strains didn't seem to be able to evade natural immunity. Now that there's been more antigenic drift, the combination you're talking about would ideally be that people who had Covid-19 before would also accept the vaccine. For how long this will be protective we don't know yet, but we just need to gain more time until the oral antivirals are successful and widespread. They are the true game changer. Not to forget the monoclonal antibodies for the immune-incompetent.

But yes, given the blunders committed by the pro-vaxxers, the anti-vaxxers are winning.

I've said before, I think if I had Fauci's job, we'd be better off, LOL. It seems pretentious but is not. We have similar training; I'm certainly just as qualified in terms of training. In the past I've been in positions from which I could have a chance at climbing to a position like his... not anymore, since I have considerably decreased my responsibilities and I largely withdrew from things, adopting a pre-retirement state, and I'm likely to retire within the next six months or a bit longer (not much longer; it will happen relatively soon). I no longer have appetite for these things; administration, politics.

But frankly, I'd have avoided many of the blunders, if I were the one in charge. And I'd name you as my main advisor, haha! Together, with my training, and your ability to catch me in error and/or to show me an alternative way to understand the situation, I think we'd have found the best strategies.

 

Any doctor saying the vaccines are "very dangerous" should indeed lose his/her license to practice medicine. That's a very dangerous professional.

 

Well, then, you didn't comprehend fully what you read, because while it is possible for the vaccinated to still spread the virus, it happens in a much smaller proportion, for various reasons I've detailed especially in my responses to poster Kazenatsu. Possible? Yes. Very likely? No (while yes, it's very likely for the non-vaccinated; the new strains spread like wild fire). I recently posted in one of his thread, several scientific papers demonstrating it.

 

What does race have to do with it? And you might want to read more of the thread and not just respond to the original post. Sure, I understand the sarcasm; you must be thinking I'm a liberal and you want to give me a dose of my supposed own medicine. Wrong target. I'm not a liberal, even though my positions on this may overlap with those the liberals also embrace. The overlap is not perfect though (e.g., I'm against mandates) and definitely in other areas of political opinion I'm no liberal.

My positions have to do with my professional training and long practice in Medicine, Virology, and Immunology. It's from this standpoint that I defend vaccines, monoclonal antibodies (something the liberals hate), the new antivirals (especially Paxlovid), dexamethasone, enoxaparin, etc., and I don't support ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Politics have nothing to do with what I do or don't support (scientific evidence is the driver of my support); I actually would love to see politics removed from the equation, and people going back to seeing this issue as what it is, a biological issue that equally affects people of all ideological backgrounds.