Covidiots thread

[HomerJS]

Really sad story of the effect of the COVID surge in Florida. But don't worry, DeSantis is on top of it.
A Boy Went to a COVID-Swamped ER. He Waited for Hours. Then His Appendix Burst. (msn.com)

 

[H T C]

Though vaccinating as many as possible is important, WHO is vaccinated is ALSO VERY IMPORTANT, and i don't mean a specific individual.

It matters little to have 60% fully vaccinated, if those NOT vaccinated include A HUGE PERCENTAGE of those "more susceptible to COVID complications". While it's very hard to quantify those susceptible due to other medical conditions, it's a lot easier to quantify those 60+ year old people and, if a high number of these people remain unnvaccinated, most of the effort taken to vaccinate that 60% goes to waste because there's more than enough unnvaccinated people to swamp hospitals, thus endangering people with other medical conditions

 

[repoman0]

Really sad story of the effect of the COVID surge in Florida. But don't worry, DeSantis is on top of it.
A Boy Went to a COVID-Swamped ER. He Waited for Hours. Then His Appendix Burst. (msn.com)

Anti-vaxxers need to be kicked out of the ICU to make room for these people who need care. Pretty simple ethical triaging decision.

 

[dullard]

Though vaccinating as many as possible is important, WHO is vaccinated is ALSO VERY IMPORTANT, and i don't mean a specific individual.

It matters little to have 60% fully vaccinated, if those NOT vaccinated include A HUGE PERCENTAGE of those "more susceptible to COVID complications". While it's very hard to quantify those susceptible due to other medical conditions, it's a lot easier to quantify those 60+ year old people and, if a high number of these people remain unnvaccinated, most of the effort taken to vaccinate that 60% goes to waste because there's more than enough unnvaccinated people to swamp hospitals, thus endangering people with other medical conditions

I think the most important is to vaccinate those who spread it most--rather than those who are most vulnerable to the infection. A vulnerable home-bound person being vaccinated does nothing to end the disease and can only at most save one life. But vaccinating the person who takes care of the home-bound person does both: could save the life of the person who is home-bound but also anyone else in their social sphere.

Yes, vaccinated people can spread the disease, but they are far less likely to do so. And of course, the best solution is to vaccinate both.

 

[MtnMan]

Ah don't gargle with it, use the iodine as neti pot. That burn just showing its killing all viruses.

Wat? No iodine enema?

 

[Jhhnn]

Though vaccinating as many as possible is important, WHO is vaccinated is ALSO VERY IMPORTANT, and i don't mean a specific individual.

It matters little to have 60% fully vaccinated, if those NOT vaccinated include A HUGE PERCENTAGE of those "more susceptible to COVID complications". While it's very hard to quantify those susceptible due to other medical conditions, it's a lot easier to quantify those 60+ year old people and, if a high number of these people remain unnvaccinated, most of the effort taken to vaccinate that 60% goes to waste because there's more than enough unnvaccinated people to swamp hospitals, thus endangering people with other medical conditions

According to the NYT tracker, 93% of people over 65 have one dose & 83% have two doses. If that were true for everybody 12 & older we'd be in much better shape.

 

[H T C]

I think the most important is to vaccinate those who spread it most--rather than those who are most vulnerable to the infection. A vulnerable home-bound person being vaccinated does nothing to end the disease and can only at most save one life. But vaccinating the person who takes care of the home-bound person does both: could save the life of the person who is home-bound but also anyone else in their social sphere.

Yes, vaccinated people can spread the disease, but they are far less likely to do so. And of course, the best solution is to vaccinate both.

While true, it's not those that "swamp the hospitals" so, and until both are vaccinated, better start with those more vulnerable.

Like i said earlier, it's far easier to quantify those vulnerable by age than it is by other medical conditions and, in that respect, Portugal has done a fantastic job. This is Portugal's current vaccination status, posted earlier today (click for full picture):



- top left --- people with @ least one dose
- top right --- people fully vaccinated: includes people with just one dose that had a previous COVID infection as well as people that took the single dose vaccine
- middle left --- age groups
- middle center --- @ least one dose: people and percentage
- middle right --- fully vaccinated: people and percentage
- bottom left --- doses the country has received
- bottom right --- doses the country has administered

Last week (Monday to Sunday), Portugal had an average of 9 daily fatalities from COVID, which is the equivalent of 288 in USA (Portugal has roughly 1 / 32 of USA's population). And before someone says "why so many dead with such high vaccination rates?", our R(t) Number has been steadily dropping and now stands @ 0.83, meaning new daily cases are diminishing substantially (click for full picture):

According to the NYT tracker, 93% of people over 65 have one dose & 83% have two doses. If that were true for everybody 12 & older we'd be in much better shape.

Any idea how many people the missing 17% without 2 doses represent? If we're talking about a HUGE NUMBER of people, then they can STILL swamp hospitals and that means that having such a high percentage of vaccinated people IS NOT ENOUGH.

 

[Jhhnn]

Any idea how many people the missing 17% without 2 doses represent? If we're talking about a HUGE NUMBER of people, then they can STILL swamp hospitals and that means that having such a high percentage of vaccinated people IS NOT ENOUGH.

That 17% will shrink rapidly to 7% over the next month, I figure, as people show up for their second dose. About 17% of the US population is 65 or older so those who remain unvaxxed will be about 1.2% of the total population. Their vax rate is about 20% higher than younger cohorts who are the source of our current difficulties.

 

[H T C]

That 17% will shrink rapidly to 7% over the next month, I figure, as people show up for their second dose. About 17% of the US population is 65 or older so those who remain unvaxxed will be about 1.2% of the total population. Their vax rate is about 20% higher than younger cohorts who are the source of our current difficulties.

Again, it's not the percentage of those that remain unvaxxed: it's the percentage of those vulnerable that remain unvaxxed. Depending on the total number (NOT percentage) we're talking about here, it can still be MORE THAN ENOUGH to overwhelm hospitals.

Also, it takes roughly 10 to 15 days after being administered for the vaccine to be "working as intended", so it's around 40 to 45 days and not 30 as you suggest.

 

[sportage]

I brought up "herd immunity". I do believe we are heading to herd immunity. That would explain the drop in new infections despite the high rate of unvaccinated. Those unvaccinated will eventually catch the extremely highly contagious delta variant, and probably survive covid, and hopefully get those immunity cells going in their body.

So you add in the people who are vaccinated, along with those unvaccinated who have already or soon will catch the covid, and you end up with herd immunity thus less covid going around. Good old herd immunity. I guess that is one way to do it, to rid society of the covid. Not the best way mind you, but one way of getting there. However, just getting the vaccine would be a lot faster and a lot easier.

But when have most Americans ever preferred to do anything the easy way? The easy way would have been America electing Hillary instead of Trump. We'd never had that insurrection, or any need for the impeachments, or suffered the covid deaths, or and the best or of them all.... we'd never have had Rudy Giuliani.

 

[Jhhnn]

Again, it's not the percentage of those that remain unvaxxed: it's the percentage of those vulnerable that remain unvaxxed. Depending on the total number (NOT percentage) we're talking about here, it can still be MORE THAN ENOUGH to overwhelm hospitals.

Also, it takes roughly 10 to 15 days after being administered for the vaccine to be "working as intended", so it's around 40 to 45 days and not 30 as you suggest.

You're just quibbling at this point. There are several comorbidities that define vulnerability. Age is only one, as are high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity, emphysema, immunosuppression & poor health in general because of a variety of circumstances. I probably missed some. That cohort of the unvaxxed greatly outnumbers unvaxxed seniors at this point & accounts for roughly 2/3 of hospitalizations.

COVID-19 Hospitalizations

gis.cdc.gov

 

[pauldun170]

CEO of Conway Regional Health System sends notice to idiots on staff

Hospital staff must swear off Tylenol, Tums to get religious vaccine exemption

Hospital CEO aims to educate staff on the full scope of what they’re claiming.

arstechnica.com

 

[H T C]

You're just quibbling at this point. There are several comorbidities that define vulnerability. Age is only one, as are high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity, emphysema, immunosuppression & poor health in general because of a variety of circumstances. I probably missed some. That cohort of the unvaxxed greatly outnumbers unvaxxed seniors at this point & accounts for roughly 2/3 of hospitalizations.

COVID-19 Hospitalizations

gis.cdc.gov

Was not aware of that. I referred to age only because that's the easiest to get "a proper head count". Like you said, the others are WAY MORE DIFFICULT to get "a proper head count".

 

[manly]

I think the most important is to vaccinate those who spread it most--rather than those who are most vulnerable to the infection. A vulnerable home-bound person being vaccinated does nothing to end the disease and can only at most save one life. But vaccinating the person who takes care of the home-bound person does both: could save the life of the person who is home-bound but also anyone else in their social sphere.

Yes, vaccinated people can spread the disease, but they are far less likely to do so. And of course, the best solution is to vaccinate both.

@H T C is mostly right. The U.S. was one of the earliest to begin COVID vaccinations, and our aggregate vaccination numbers don't look too bad compared to UK or even Israel (except they have boosted millions). However, if you drill into it, you'll see massive disparities in where vaccines have been given. Namely, immunization is highest in the Northeast and a handful of Western states. This is why U.S. hospitals are getting hit so hard in this 4th wave, because communities in many states have effectively low levels of immunity. The UK for example has held up better despite sustaining very high infection counts for months now. It may sound well and good that 83% of U.S. seniors (age 65+) are fully vaccinated, but this figure masks the uneven distribution across the country.

Your point is correct in that employees at nursing homes have a low vaccination rate, and frankly COVID vaccination should have been mandated sooner rather than later. Unfortunately, the U.S. is also experiencing massive staffing shortages in various industries so there are knock-on effects to vaccine requirements.

To paraphrase what H T C is saying, it wouldn't matter that much if you vaccinated every single teenager in the U.S. They probably spread a lot of SARS-CoV-2, but they aren't developing severe COVID and inundating hospitals. I don't have the data in front of me, but we all know that most of the 1800 dying daily still trend older and unvaccinated. To be clear, I'm not saying we shouldn't vaccinate younger Americans. Just that age 0-17 are still a small portion of COVID hospitalizations, and an even smaller portion of deaths.

The Atlantic had a piece recently that COVID hospitalizations, which have generally been considered the most important metric to follow, is losing some of its meaning lately:

Our Most Reliable Pandemic Number Is Losing Meaning

A new study suggests that almost half of those hospitalized with COVID-19 have mild or asymptomatic cases.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[dullard]

@H T C is mostly right. The U.S. was one of the earliest to begin COVID vaccinations, and our aggregate vaccination numbers don't look too bad compared to UK or even Israel (except they have boosted millions). However, if you drill into it, you'll see massive disparities in where vaccines have been given. Namely, immunization is highest in the Northeast and a handful of Western states. This is why U.S. hospitals are getting hit so hard in this 4th wave, because communities in many states have effectively low levels of immunity. The UK for example has held up better despite sustaining very high infection counts for months now. It may sound well and good that 83% of U.S. seniors (age 65+) are fully vaccinated, but this figure masks the uneven distribution across the country.

Your point is correct in that employees at nursing homes have a low vaccination rate, and frankly COVID vaccination should have been mandated sooner rather than later. Unfortunately, the U.S. is also experiencing massive staffing shortages in various industries so there are knock-on effects to vaccine requirements.

To paraphrase what H T C is saying, it wouldn't matter that much if you vaccinated every single teenager in the U.S. They probably spread a lot of SARS-CoV-2, but they aren't developing severe COVID and inundating hospitals. I don't have the data in front of me, but we all know that most of the 1800 dying daily still trend older and unvaccinated. To be clear, I'm not saying we shouldn't vaccinate younger Americans. Just that age 0-17 are still a small portion of COVID hospitalizations, and an even smaller portion of deaths.

The issue is that if we vaccinated all vulnerable people now, it still will be too late. Hospitalizations for this wave are likely to peak in a week or two--far before the vaccinations actually are fully completed or effective. Actually according to some models, hospitalizations peaked last week.

Since it is too late to avoid hospital crowding, it is just better not to be exposed to Covid (by stopping the spread) than to allow it to spread uncontrolled and hope to minimize hospitalizations. Had this question been posed in June, I would have agreed with H T C. But not now, it is too late. All we can do for this wave is to stop the next wave.

 

[manly]

The issue is that if we vaccinated all vulnerable people now, it still will be too late. Hospitalizations for this wave are likely to peak in a week or two--far before the vaccinations actually are fully completed or effective. Actually according to some models, hospitalizations peaked last week.

Since it is too late to avoid hospital crowding, it is just better not to be exposed to Covid (by stopping the spread) than to allow it to spread uncontrolled and hope to minimize hospitalizations. Had this question been posed in June, I would have agreed with H T C. But not now, it is too late. All we can do for this wave is to stop the next wave.

Umm, that's completely beside the point and I'd argue a straw man. H T C never said anything like "to stop the current wave, we need to target vaccinating the most vulnerable." Of course it's way too late for that, but it's not too late to get people immunized for the winter. Which I suspect will be the 5th and likely final "wave" of infections in the U.S.

Furthermore, it's great to argue we need to "bend the curve" now to save hospitals, but I've barely heard the words "social distancing" in recent months. We're well beyond that point already. Delta is going to do whatever delta will do; meanwhile southern governors are trying to one-up each other in the asshole department of how to make the pandemic worse. I wholeheartedly agree with you that in any areas where ICU beds are rapidly depleting, there should be mitigations. And this was the case last December as well. But the irony is that in those areas, nobody is doing anything about it. I refer to it as the "see no evil" approach.

I'm all for having everyone age 12+ getting vaccinated (and ultimately below age 12 with FDA approval), but the reality is the bulk of hospitalizations and deaths are still in ages 50+. So when H T C says vaccinate the more vulnerable, that's more or less what he means. Vaccinating every last teenager isn't going to impact the trajectory of this pandemic.

But honestly all this talk is kind of academic. We don't have a supply-side problem with the vaccine, it's all on the demand side. If people choose to skip the vaccine, they're exposing themselves to a far greater risk and families and society will deal with the outcomes. The Biden administration is taking one last crack at increasing uptake, but it's not like we need a conscious strategy to vaccinate the more vulnerable. We know demographically who they are and what regions they live in, and it's been their choice to "roll the dice" with delta. Remember that H T C is in Portugal, so he's looking at it from a public policy viewpoint. Where we are, it's largely a political tribalism problem.

 

[UNCjigga]

In case you thought kids catching Covid isn't a big deal:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1438353332838539266

 

[Fenixgoon]

In case you thought kids catching Covid isn't a big deal:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1438353332838539266

You know what the kids also caught but the lamestream media isn't talking about? A big ol case of freedom /S

 

[MtnMan]

Again, it's not the percentage of those that remain unvaxxed: it's the percentage of those vulnerable that remain unvaxxed. Depending on the total number (NOT percentage) we're talking about here, it can still be MORE THAN ENOUGH to overwhelm hospitals.

Also, it takes roughly 10 to 15 days after being administered for the vaccine to be "working as intended", so it's around 40 to 45 days and not 30 as you suggest.

So after you post your epidemiology credentials, I would love to hear who is NOT vulnerable to COVID. The children that have died of COVID, the teenagers that have died of COVID, the 20-year-olds that have died of COVID, the 30-year-old... etc.

Precisely who is not vulnerable? Inquiring minds are eager for your insight on this.

 

[woolfe9998]

deleted comment, will replace.

 

[woolfe9998]

In case you thought kids catching Covid isn't a big deal:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1438353332838539266

Why isn't there evidence of causation here? I mean, you have a correlation: COVID and increased cases of diabetes. Can't they figure out whether, among those who have been newly diagnosed with diabetes, there is a disproportionately high percentage who had COVID as compared to the general population? Of course they can tell us that. Because all that information is in the same medical chart for each individual. If a child comes in to the doctor and gets diagnosed with diabetes, the doctor can look right at the child's chart to see if he had COVID or not.

Instead of providing this information, the article presents only a population level correlation when good evidence to either verify or reject causation is certainly ascertainable.

Also, one person quoted in the article thinks that COVID mitigation measures are to blame rather than COVID itself, suggesting that a parent losing his job could cause "emotional distress" in the child, which can cause diabetes. Here's another theory which sounds more plausible to me: when you have to stay at home all the time, you eat more and exercise less. Guess what eating more and exercising less causes.

I'll wait for better information before drawing any conclusions.

 

[Paratus]

Well boys I think we got enough information to assign causation.

Just a reminder how it started:

 

[sportage]

I have come to believe that the problem with people refusing to take the vaccine(s) lies with the media. Every time a news show or news program talks about anything vaccines, they always show needles going into arms, and into arms, and into arms, one... after.... another. A constant barrage of needles in the arm during any and every report on the covid vaccine. STOP IT !!!!!
The news media has got to quit showing needles going into the arms while they are trying to convince people to get vaccinated. PLEASE STOP IT !!!!

Imagine if the military ran recruitment ads on TV with showing men and women with their arms blown off or legs blown off, showing men and women in wheelchairs living in long-term nursing facilities. Or showing funerals and coffins draped with the American flag. Would anyone want to join the navy or the army or the marines if the recruitment ads only showed blood and guts?
No... no one would want to join.

Well, same theory goes for the vaccine(s) and the needles in the arms. I have come to believe that just maybe the people refusing to get vaccinated is not at all some freedom thing or constitutional rights thing or an anti-government thing. People may be refusing to get vaccinated simply because THEY HATE THE NEEDLES. And after watching any TV news program concerning vaccines, anti-vaxxers will see needles. Lots of needles. And lots of needles going straight into the arm. OUCH!
People are not concerned with personal freedoms, people are afraid to admit that they are big babies when it comes to needles and shots. People don't like needles. Quit showing those damn needles.

 

[H T C]

So after you post your epidemiology credentials, I would love to hear who is NOT vulnerable to COVID. The children that have died of COVID, the teenagers that have died of COVID, the 20-year-olds that have died of COVID, the 30-year-old... etc.

Precisely who is not vulnerable? Inquiring minds are eager for your insight on this.

FTR, and just so that you "inquire no more", i have ZERO credentials in epidemiology.

If you check the proportion of older people that have been hit hard by this virus, relative to younger people, you'll arrive @ the conclusion that this virus is A LOT MORE DANGEROUS to older people than it is to younger people, BUT that doesn't mean it doesn't hit younger people "just as hard": it just doesn't hit them that hard AS OFTEN. Since it's a lot easier to check who's more vulnerable by age than it is with other preexisting illnesses like the ones @Jhhnn had mentioned earlier (post #2661), vaccinating older people 1st is a good way to TRY and decrease hospital admissions due to COVID, thus giving hospitals "more breathing room" for other medical issues.

 

[eelw]

I have come to believe that the problem with people refusing to take the vaccine(s) lies with the media. Every time a news show or news program talks about anything vaccines, they always show needles going into arms, and into arms, and into arms, one... after.... another. A constant barrage of needles in the arm during any and every report on the covid vaccine. STOP IT !!!!!
The news media has got to quit showing needles going into the arms while they are trying to convince people to get vaccinated. PLEASE STOP IT !!!!

Imagine if the military ran recruitment ads on TV with showing men and women with their arms blown off or legs blown off, showing men and women in wheelchairs living in long-term nursing facilities. Or showing funerals and coffins draped with the American flag. Would anyone want to join the navy or the army or the marines if the recruitment ads only showed blood and guts?
No... no one would want to join.

Well, same theory goes for the vaccine(s) and the needles in the arms. I have come to believe that just maybe the people refusing to get vaccinated is not at all some freedom thing or constitutional rights thing or an anti-government thing. People may be refusing to get vaccinated simply because THEY HATE THE NEEDLES. And after watching any TV news program concerning vaccines, anti-vaxxers will see needles. Lots of needles. And lots of needles going straight into the arm. OUCH!
People are not concerned with personal freedoms, people are afraid to admit that they are big babies when it comes to needles and shots. People don't like needles. Quit showing those damn needles.

Snowflakes indeed IF this applies to a fair percentage of the idiot antivaxxers