Have You Gotten Your Covid Vaccine? Thread.

[Brainonska511]

We had people who died in the control arms for the vaccines from COVID, and that was ethical. Yet you think asking someone to wear or not wear a mask or controlling the type of mask they wear is crossing a ethical line?

The vaccines had no proven efficacy and the patients were given the standard of care, as is done in every trial when you're trying to test for efficacy and safety. And for all we know, some horrible adverse events could have been detected when given in a large scale trial, which would mean you would be both giving something to everyone that has unknown efficacy and could harm a bunch of people.

Masks don't face those same barriers.

 

[Brovane]

The vaccines had no proven efficacy and the patients were given the standard of care, as is done in every trial when you're trying to test for efficacy and safety. And for all we know, some horrible adverse events could have been detected when given in a large scale trial, which would mean you would be both giving something to everyone that has unknown efficacy and could harm a bunch of people.

Masks don't face those same barriers.

We don't know the efficacy of masks until we perform Randomized Controlled Trials to prove the efficacy.
We don't even know the efficacy of different types of masks.

 

[Pens1566]

Then prove that mask wearing works with good randomized controlled trials. If you can't then don't tell me I have to wear a mask around you. However feel free to wear one if you think it protects you.
I used to heavily support mask wearing back in 2020 and 2021. I complied when asked to wear a mask and followed directions. However I thought at some-point there would be good studies done to prove the effectiveness of mask wearing. At least compare the effectiveness of different types of masks from cloth masks to surgical masks to N95 masks. However the CDC didn't do anything to study the effectiveness of NPI's with COVID. Which is a real shame because I think in the future we are going to see another respiratory viral pandemic and we really are not going to know what NPI's work and don't work and how effective they are at slowing the spread.

Not that you'll read or believe them but:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21735402/
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2009637117
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6947e2.htm
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720350890
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0843-2

Masks work to reduce the amount of spread. The debate is over, and has been for quite some time now. That's why no one credible talks about it any more.

I'll also add that your description of protection regarding masks is also backwards as well. So coupled with the rest of your postings on this I really question your overall grasp of the situation.

 

[Brainonska511]

We don't know the efficacy of masks until we perform Randomized Controlled Trials to prove the efficacy.
We don't even know the efficacy of different types of masks.

Except we can make some reasonable assumptions about masking and the general risk/benefit profile. You can't do the same drugs: that's why we start with small trials and work our way up to bigger trials.

Nevermind the other huge issue I identified: how do you ensure proper protocol compliance for a masking trial? It's not like you can glue it to someone's face.

 

[Brovane]

Not that you'll read or believe them but:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21735402/
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2009637117
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6947e2.htm
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720350890
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0843-2

Masks work to reduce the amount of spread. The debate is over, and has been for quite some time now. That's why no one credible talks about it any more.

I'll also add that your description of protection regarding masks is also backwards as well. So coupled with the rest of your postings on this I really question your overall grasp of the situation.

None of the studies you linked to are randomized controlled trials.
Do you have any randomized controlled trials showing that show the effectiveness of masks wearing? The only one I am aware of was done in Bangladesh.
You say the debate is over but even the WHO advises against masking kids under the age of 5 and only masking 6 to 11 year old's under some circumstances. Why does the CDC recommend a blanket masking policy for everyone over 2-years old? The CDC and WHO are in direct opposition on the decision to mask kids ages 2 to 4 in daycare and other public settings, who is right?

Dr Prasad is extremely credible. Vinay Prasad MD MPH is a hematologist-oncologist and Professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California San Francisco.

Pandemic accountability

Mask studies reach a new scientific low point

The Cochrane Review on Masks is Damning

TSA mask mandate

 

[Brovane]

Except we can make some reasonable assumptions about masking and the general risk/benefit profile. You can't do the same drugs: that's why we start with small trials and work our way up to bigger trials.

Nevermind the other huge issue I identified: how do you ensure proper protocol compliance for a masking trial? It's not like you can glue it to someone's face.

Yet they were able to run a study in Bangladesh on mask wearing.
Everything you mention is a challenge but can be compensated for in a good study.

 

[Pens1566]

None of the studies you linked to are randomized controlled trials.
Do you have any randomized controlled trials showing that show the effectiveness of masks wearing? The only one I am aware of was done in Bangladesh.
You say the debate is over but even the WHO advises against masking kids under the age of 5 and only masking 6 to 11 year old's under some circumstances. Why does the CDC recommend a blanket masking policy for everyone over 2-years old? The CDC and WHO are in direct opposition on the decision to mask kids ages 2 to 4 in daycare and other public settings, who is right?

Dr Prasad is extremely credible. Vinay Prasad MD MPH is a hematologist-oncologist and Professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California San Francisco.

Pandemic accountability

Mask studies reach a new scientific low point

The Cochrane Review on Masks is Damning

TSA mask mandate

So 6 studies ignored (in under 7 minutes, kudos) and back to "my one source is better" all while ignoring the last ~2+ pages of responses as to why RCTs are problematic in this space.

Like I said earlier, I think we're done here.

 

[Brovane]

So 6 studies ignored (in under 7 minutes, kudos) and back to "my one source is better" all while ignoring the last ~2+ pages of responses as to why RCTs are problematic in this space.

Like I said earlier, I think we're done here.

I have looked at several of those studies previously you have referenced. You have also ignored my responses as to why RCT's can de done and need to be done to give us good evidence if community masking does slow the spread of a respiratory virus.

Your comments are in my opinion what is wrong with the COVID debate in the US because of comments like this "The debate is over, and has been for quite some time now. "
Instead of being able to have a rational discussion like adults it has turned into something akin to a religious belief instead of what is good or not good public policy based on good scientific data and rational debate. We can't even have a rational discussion about masking 2 to 4 year old's in the US. I am sorry, there is nothing rational about telling a 3-year old to wear a mask but it is ok to take off the mask and then lie down and take a nap in the same room with a bunch of other 2 to 4 year old's. That is just as stupid as a MAGA person claiming that they don't need to take the vaccine because they have plenty of Vitamin D and will just use Ivermectin if they get COVID. We now have these new COVID religions.

The New COVID Religions

 

[Pens1566]

I have looked at several of those studies previously you have referenced. You have also ignored my responses as to why RCT's can de done and need to be done to give us good evidence if community masking does slow the spread of a respiratory virus.

Your comments are in my opinion what is wrong with the COVID debate in the US because of comments like this "The debate is over, and has been for quite some time now. "
Instead of being able to have a rational discussion like adults it has turned into something akin to a religious belief instead of what is good or not good public policy based on good scientific data and rational debate. We can't even have a rational discussion about masking 2 to 4 year old's in the US. I am sorry, there is nothing rational about telling a 3-year old to wear a mask but it is ok to take off the mask and then lie down and take a nap in the same room with a bunch of other 2 to 4 year old's. That is just as stupid as a MAGA person claiming that they don't need to take the vaccine because they have plenty of Vitamin D and will just use Ivermectin if they get COVID. We now have these new COVID religions.

The New COVID Religions

No, the bolded has been addressed. You just don't like the answer or don't understand what's been presented.

As for your opinion on the rest ... eh, you've ignored what was presented to you and leaned on one dude with a substack. Strong argument for science you got there.

 

[Brovane]

No, the bolded has been addressed. You just don't like the answer or don't understand what's been presented.

As for your opinion on the rest ... eh, you've ignored what was presented to you and leaned on one dude with a substack. Strong argument for science you got there.

You don't understand that in order to really show if Community masking is effective or not in reducing the spread of COVID you need to run Randomized Control Trials to find out that answer. You seem to have failed to understand this part of science.

The dude with a substack is a Medical Doctor with a Masters in Public Health. He is also a Professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California San Francisco.
He is very well qualified to talk about public health policies and what the effectiveness of them.

Sorry as I said earlier, there is nothing rational about telling a 3-year old to wear a mask but it is ok to take off the mask and then lie down and take a nap in the same room with a bunch of other 2 to 4 year old's.

 

[Brovane]

Except we can make some reasonable assumptions about masking and the general risk/benefit profile. You can't do the same drugs: that's why we start with small trials and work our way up to bigger trials.

Nevermind the other huge issue I identified: how do you ensure proper protocol compliance for a masking trial? It's not like you can glue it to someone's face.

Please explain to me the ethical dilemma with enrolling people fully vaccinated in a community mask study in 2021 to determine if Community masking will slow the spread of COVID within a fully vaccinated individuals?

 

[Brainonska511]

Please explain to me the ethical dilemma with enrolling people fully vaccinated in a community mask study in 2021 to determine if Community masking will slow the spread of COVID within a fully vaccinated individuals?

We a priori know that COVID is predominantly transmitted by droplets, and that masks of sufficient quality limit the quantity expelled, thus giving a reasonable assumptions that masking would be quite successful at stopping or limiting transmission. And in fact, a Dutch study did show this, it just didn't reach statistical significance outlined in the protocol (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33205991/ ), so they couldn't just make a claim that it definitely reduced transmission.

Anyway, we know that masking can help, or have extremely reasonable and valid assumptions that it will help, so ethically assigning people to a group that doesn't get to mask, even with vaccination as a prerequisite, still puts them at risk of harm. As tested, vaccines did not get tested to determine if they stop transmission; they were only tested to see if they prevented severe disease or death.

And then there is the whole nonethical confounding factors of behavioral changes induced by the behavior being measured and general compliance with proper mask wearing.

 

[MtnMan]

Vaccinated, and boosted x3, the last being the Pfizer Bivalent. Still caught COVID, but it didn't kill me or even send me to the hospital. Felt like crap, sore throat from hell. Started anti-viral treatment on day #2 from onset of symptoms, first positive test. Given my age and health issues, I sincerely believe, the vaccine kept me out of the hospital or morgue.

Wife, also vaccinated plus boosted x3, escaped it totally, even though we slept in the same bed at least 2 nights after I had the first symptom.

 

[Pens1566]

You don't understand that in order to really show if Community masking is effective or not in reducing the spread of COVID you need to run Randomized Control Trials to find out that answer. You seem to have failed to understand this part of science.

The dude with a substack is a Medical Doctor with a Masters in Public Health. He is also a Professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California San Francisco.
He is very well qualified to talk about public health policies and what the effectiveness of them.

Sorry as I said earlier, there is nothing rational about telling a 3-year old to wear a mask but it is ok to take off the mask and then lie down and take a nap in the same room with a bunch of other 2 to 4 year old's.

No, you seem to think that an RCT is the only way to show any useful effect. This simply isn't the case as evidenced by the numerous other studies all showing the same things.

And yes, the "dude with a substack" is in fact an MD with some credentials. Then again, so is the "Demon Sperm Doctor". If he really had something to show, it wouldn't be put forth in a substack with literally no editorial coverage or review process. It would be as a scholarly article in some reputable journal. Funny how that hasn't been the case, huh?

You keep using this bit about kids as if you think it's some rational point as to masks being useless. It's not. It's a point about kids don't do anything they're told anyway (especially at that age), and they aren't really a valid data point in the discussion.

At this point, I'm honestly not sure why you keep digging this hole ...

 

[Brovane]

And yes, the "dude with a substack" is in fact an MD with some credentials. Then again, so is the "Demon Sperm Doctor". If he really had something to show, it wouldn't be put forth in a substack with literally no editorial coverage or review process. It would be as a scholarly article in some reputable journal. Funny how that hasn't been the case, huh?

Vinay Prasad Academic Articles

It is almost like he might actually be a Professor in Epidemiology and Biostatistics.

You keep using this bit about kids as if you think it's some rational point as to masks being useless. It's not. It's a point about kids don't do anything they're told anyway (especially at that age), and they aren't really a valid data point in the discussion.

It shows how irrational and anti-science the US masking policies are. However feel free to keep digging a deeper hole defending dumb policies.

 

[Brovane]

We a priori know that COVID is predominantly transmitted by droplets, and that masks of sufficient quality limit the quantity expelled, thus giving a reasonable assumptions that masking would be quite successful at stopping or limiting transmission. And in fact, a Dutch study did show this, it just didn't reach statistical significance outlined in the protocol (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33205991/ ), so they couldn't just make a claim that it definitely reduced transmission.

Anyway, we know that masking can help, or have extremely reasonable and valid assumptions that it will help, so ethically assigning people to a group that doesn't get to mask, even with vaccination as a prerequisite, still puts them at risk of harm. As tested, vaccines did not get tested to determine if they stop transmission; they were only tested to see if they prevented severe disease or death.

And then there is the whole nonethical confounding factors of behavioral changes induced by the behavior being measured and general compliance with proper mask wearing.

The volunteers for the study would have informed consent. If someone has concerns they don't have to participate in the study.
There is already a large group of people that go about everyday in public settings that are not masked.

 

[Brainonska511]

The volunteers for the study would have informed consent. If someone has concerns they don't have to participate in the study.

Informed consent doesn't give investigators permission to actively put people in harms way.

There is already a large group of people that go about everyday in public settings that are not masked.

Great. That's also not a clinical trial with investigators assigning people to a mask or no mask group. Also, it's not as simple as just randomly assigning people like you're about to play dodge ball: you also need to match baseline and demographic characteristics to limit those pesky confounding variables.

If you want some further reading on the issue of RCTs for masking, this perspective outlines some of the issues that have been discussed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7992121/

 

[Brainonska511]

Vinay Prasad Academic Articles

It is almost like he might actually be a Professor in Epidemiology and Biostatistics.



It shows how irrational and anti-science the US masking policies are. However feel free to keep digging a deeper hole defending dumb policies.

Dr. Prasad, as a hemato-oncologist, seems like he might be a bit of a quack, a grifter, or just out of his lane of expertise when it comes to covid:

Dr. Vinay Prasad echoes a common antivax trope that portrays concern about a deadly disease as irrational fear

Before the pandemic, antivaxxers likened concern about childhood diseases to mental illness. In the age of COVID-19, Dr. Vinay Prasad accuses medicine of "legitimizing" irrational anxiety and says we

sciencebasedmedicine.org

Dr. Vinay Prasad: “Public Health’s (Mis)Truth Problem”

Dr. Vinay Prasad continues to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the government response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

sciencebasedmedicine.org

Moral outrage is not a good guide to pandemic policy reform. Vinay Prasad, please take note.

Vinay Prasad identifies some dubious problems in the government's efforts to protect public health, and offers some questionable solutions.

sciencebasedmedicine.org

Controversial oncologist Dr. Vinay Prasad disavowed by dean, lectures to GSBS

Dr. Vinay Prasad delivered a virtual lecture to the Tufts Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences on Feb. 17 following GSBS Dean Daniel Jay’s disavowal of one of Prasad’s blog posts, which Jay characterized as antisemitic.

tuftsdaily.com

 

[balloonshark]

If you search this forum for the word "mask" there are plenty of other threads to have a mask debate.

 

[Pens1566]

Vinay Prasad Academic Articles

It is almost like he might actually be a Professor in Epidemiology and Biostatistics.



It shows how irrational and anti-science the US masking policies are. However feel free to keep digging a deeper hole defending dumb policies.

For someone so prolific in articles, it's odd that none of those many many many articles had anything to do with clinical COVID. The one that was closest to it was about myocarditis in vaccine recipients. Which still hasn't been demonstrated to occur above the base rate in the general population. Oh, amusingly enough, it wasn't an RCT either but a systematic review. Giggle. Too funny.

I also don't see many having to do with epidemiology or virology, mostly oncology. Which is also odd for someone that claims to be an expert in that area. Odd that he hasn't put any of his COVID related work up for journals. Huh, wonder why?

So you're either not paying attention to details and didn't notice any of this, or you're just dense.

 

[abj13]

Vinay Prasad cannot explain a series of simple observations. When the pandemic occurred, where did all the other respiratory viruses go in the second half of 2020 and into 2021 when most of the stay at home orders ended? Vacation?

It was like magic. Common respiratory viruses that cause pandemics each year disappeared in 2020-2021. Why were there 100+ children dying of influenza each year, yet in 2020-2021, only one death occurred? Why did the influenza hospitalization rate drop to <1 per 100,000 in 2020-2022, when most years it ranges from 5-10/100,000?

RSV is one of the most common causes of hospitalization for children in the winter. Why did RSV disappear for the winter of 2020 into 2021, only to come back out of season starting in September 2021?

Why did metapneumovirus take a year off in 2020 into 2021?

Enterovirus D68 causes outbreaks every other year in the early fall. It occurred in 2016, 2018... yet was barely a blip in the fall 2020. Why was that?

 

[Brovane]

Vinay Prasad cannot explain a series of simple observations. When the pandemic occurred, where did all the other respiratory viruses go in the second half of 2020 and into 2021 when most of the stay at home orders ended? Vacation?

It was like magic. Common respiratory viruses that cause pandemics each year disappeared in 2020-2021. Why were there 100+ children dying of influenza each year, yet in 2020-2021, only one death occurred? Why did the influenza hospitalization rate drop to <1 per 100,000 in 2020-2022, when most years it ranges from 5-10/100,000?

RSV is one of the most common causes of hospitalization for children in the winter. Why did RSV disappear for the winter of 2020 into 2021, only to come back out of season starting in September 2021?

Why did metapneumovirus take a year off in 2020 into 2021?

Enterovirus D68 causes outbreaks every other year in the early fall. It occurred in 2016, 2018... yet was barely a blip in the fall 2020. Why was that?

My children both didn't attend in person school the entire 2020-2021 school year and did remote learning. In California for Halloween 2020, local health agencies didn't even want kids doing trick-or-treating. Personally we didn't even attend any family gatherings for all of 2020. I know international air travel and domestic travel remained extremely suppressed through the end of 2020 despite lifting of the stricter stay at home orders.

My children where still required to mask in the classroom in the start of 2021-2022 school year when they went back to in person learning. It wasn't until March of 2022 that indoor masking requirement was lifted. This was in Southern California.

You could explain the severe drop in RSV cases by the greatly suppressed air travel (especially international) and lack of kids gathering in person, either with friends or in school through the 2020-2021 season. A lot of companies were still allowing full time WFH in the 2020-2021 season for employees that could. I know my employer wasn't allowing any travel through all of 2020 and 2021 unless it was business critical. They only started relaxing this policy in 2022.

 

[Brovane]

Informed consent doesn't give investigators permission to actively put people in harms way.

After you have COVID anti-bodies through vaccination what are you gaining by trying to delay your encounter with COVID-19? It is another circulating corona-virus that isn't going away and we are all going to get sick with COVID multiple times through-out our lifetimes unless you want to live in a bunker away from people.

 

[abj13]

My children both didn't attend in person school the entire 2020-2021 school year and did remote learning. In California for Halloween 2020, local health agencies didn't even want kids doing trick-or-treating. Personally we didn't even attend any family gatherings for all of 2020. I know international air travel and domestic travel remained extremely suppressed through the end of 2020 despite lifting of the stricter stay at home orders.

My children where still required to mask in the classroom in the start of 2021-2022 school year when they went back to in person learning. It wasn't until March of 2022 that indoor masking requirement was lifted. This was in Southern California.

You could explain the severe drop in RSV cases by the greatly suppressed air travel and lack of kids gathering in person, either with friends or in school through the 2020-2021 season.

If airline traffic dictates respiratory virus spread, influenza and metapneumovirus should have made massive reappearances in the winter of 2021. They didn't.

Not everyone followed what you experienced with your school district. In my area there was quite a spread of approaches. But hey, shouldn't that be a great opportunity to study SARS-CoV-2 spread in schools with and without good masking policies? Turns out many others had that very idea: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 . The common theme to all of them? Masking reduced viral transmission.

And perhaps one of the best studies 11 where they studied the outcomes in over 1,000,000 US students. Same finding.

 

[Pohemi]

Then prove that mask wearing works with good randomized controlled trials. If you can't then don't tell me I have to wear a mask around you. However feel free to wear one if you think it protects you.
I used to heavily support mask wearing back in 2020 and 2021. I complied when asked to wear a mask and followed directions. However I thought at some-point there would be good studies done to prove the effectiveness of mask wearing. At least compare the effectiveness of different types of masks from cloth masks to surgical masks to N95 masks. However the CDC didn't do anything to study the effectiveness of NPI's with COVID.

What I'm reading here is that you masked for a while.
Followed advice and/or mandates for masking.
Then, when the CDC didn't conduct your standard of RCT on mask efficacy, you took off the mask, threw it on the ground, stomped on it, and started claiming, "MASKS DON'T WORK! THIS ONE DOCTOR PROVED IT!"

You want to ignore ALL other studies and data because they weren't RCT. You're refuting reality and common sense IMO.

No different than MAGAtards being idiotic and railing against masking and vaxxing for illogical reasons.