COVID-19 / Coronavirus Pandemic


Status
Not open for further replies.
A doctor told me that the problem with the AZ vaccine is that for younger populations the risk of vaccine-related health problems, as low as it is, is not significantly different from the risk of COVID-19 related health problems.
How young? I mean it makes sense, but the pandemic is turning to younger people. I've also heard cases are more often serious (I mean once someone is in hospital it's now more often that they get in intensive care, or they get there fewer days after admission).
This may have to do with the oldest groups being vaccinated. But they sometimes say it's the English variant (not definitive, I've heard contradictory reports). And I think live/job plays a role too, beyond the oldest groups more than age, just a more difficult criteria to use.
The other question is whether vaccinating young people can stop transmission (I'd say not so much, I don't know).
But yes, maybe we should push to vaccinate older people around the world before vaccinating the young anywhere.
I couldn't tell, I think we're going to keep vaccinating lots of people and changing vaccines as the virus changes without ever getting rid of it. Unless everybody starts locking down hard and then reopening without travel in or out, which most people seem to reject.
It occurred to me, they found the clotting problem with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, because it happened to people it wasn't supposed to happen to, women with low platelet counts. How do they know whether or not clots in people at higher risk for clotting are vaccine related or not?
I don''t understand that either. I think it was 5 cases per million in the general population and 0.9 cases per million in J&J patients. That alone would seem to tell that J&J protects against thrombosis.
But as you say it depends which subgroups you look at. But how do they know which ones to look at ? And they must not know the platelet count for most of those 6,8 million vaccinated people, do they?
I guess that's why doctors spend time in University learning their things.
I also don't know whether the low platelet count before the injection is a cause for concern or whether whatever the platelet count, the injection may in rare cases cause both thrombosis and low platelet count (maybe it just uses up the platelets to build clots and leaves few platelets in the circulating blood??).
 
I know Wally said he didn't give a crap about this thread, but I'm still on the fence about discussing off topic stuff here.

See, FiveThirtyEight recorded its worst aggregate approval rating for President Biden ever yesterday. I'm thinking it's because he announced our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Damnit, America, you don't actually want more war, do you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rSl
Not the way I see it,
I have seen plenty of cases where doctors were making people sick by over-prescribing. One of the recent experiences is a guy who gets ton of medication for over 20 years with nothing improving. We looked into it and apparently his doses are much higher than the manufacturers recommend and also many of his worst symptoms are side-effects of those medicines of which he gets way too high doses. When talking to his doctor the doctor said things like that we ought to not read the side-effects because it would scare us and he kept trying to not have to explain himself saying that he is the expert and we must just trust him without requiring explanation. Also, he was not even aware of what symptoms his patient had, he actually started talking about different symptoms and we had to explain to him what the real problems were. He has no interest in his patient at all and was just money grubbing. With a lot of pressing we convinced him to co-operate with reducing medications but it required a lot of pushing.

These kind of doctors are not rare, unfortunately. Many people have had great health improvements after reducing their medication with the help of their doctors (and just for the record, it must normally be done under medical supervision because reducing medication can be dangerous). Those doctors normally are against reducing medication at first and are only willing to co-operate after significant effort is put into coercing them, virtually always to the relief of the patient as his side-effects reduce.

It really makes sense too: if the doctor gets more money if he sells more medication then he has an incentive to sell more medication. Combined with the fact that too much medication damages health we get a situation were the doctor gets more money when he damages his patients' health then if he properly looks out for them. This is a conflict of interest. Some doctors also seem to not want to spend too much time on their patients, I see a lot of people with mental problems having this problem. They're just used as dispensers for medicine.

Doing some research so that you are better suited to pull information out of your doctor and to call him out on obvious nonsense (such as when he contradicts the manufacturer's recommendations while pretending to be on one line with them) is good. If your doctor is careless with you for extra money and to save time then you will end up sick and he will end up rich, it is good to keep that in mind.
 
I have seen plenty of cases where doctors were making people sick by over-prescribing. One of the recent experiences is a guy who gets ton of medication for over 20 years with nothing improving. We looked into it and apparently his doses are much higher than the manufacturers recommend and also many of his worst symptoms are side-effects of those medicines of which he gets way too high doses. When talking to his doctor the doctor said things like that we ought to not read the side-effects because it would scare us and he kept trying to not have to explain himself saying that he is the expert and we must just trust him without requiring explanation. Also, he was not even aware of what symptoms his patient had, he actually started talking about different symptoms and we had to explain to him what the real problems were. He has no interest in his patient at all and was just money grubbing. With a lot of pressing we convinced him to co-operate with reducing medications but it required a lot of pushing.

These kind of doctors are not rare, unfortunately. Many people have had great health improvements after reducing their medication with the help of their doctors (and just for the record, it must normally be done under medical supervision because reducing medication can be dangerous). Those doctors normally are against reducing medication at first and are only willing to co-operate after significant effort is put into coercing them, virtually always to the relief of the patient as his side-effects reduce.

It really makes sense too: if the doctor gets more money if he sells more medication then he has an incentive to sell more medication. Combined with the fact that too much medication damages health we get a situation were the doctor gets more money when he damages his patients' health then if he properly looks out for them. This is a conflict of interest. Some doctors also seem to not want to spend too much time on their patients, I see a lot of people with mental problems having this problem. They're just used as dispensers for medicine.

Doing some research so that you are better suited to pull information out of your doctor and to call him out on obvious nonsense (such as when he contradicts the manufacturer's recommendations while pretending to be on one line with them) is good. If your doctor is careless with you for extra money and to save time then you will end up sick and he will end up rich, it is good to keep that in mind.
Who is we? An anti-vaccination activist group, a your-body-is-your-temple cult, a national medication oversight organisation, you and the bunch of your split personalities doing what god instructed you to do, a doctor consultant firm, a patients protection association?
 
I know Wally said he didn't give a crap about this thread, but I'm still on the fence about discussing off topic stuff here.

See, FiveThirtyEight recorded its worst aggregate approval rating for President Biden ever yesterday. I'm thinking it's because he announced our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Damnit, America, you don't actually want more war, do you?
Well this is the covid thread. I know I've been guilt of replying to covid stuff in other threads, which is perhaps forgivable in the current situation, I can't say. But that gives no reason to allow other stuff in here ;)
 
Who is we?
Just me and family. We sometimes help out family or friends of family. We just happen to know a lot of elderly and some very sick people. Professional care for the elderly or sick here is very poor so these people often just get dumped into apartments and then mostly forgotten about. That is why sometimes they need a bit of help or attention from friends or family. Things like visiting them, cooking for them, defending their rights, etc. Especially some of my family are really dedicated to helping these people. It is nothing special and certainly not some special interest group or anything. But it does give me a view on what the life of elderly and sick typically is like and how care taking and medical professionals often deal with the conflicts of interest that arise.
If you are vulnerable then you will likely get abused. If you rely on a single individual, who has a conflict of interest against you, for 100% of your information regarding an important choice then you make yourself vulnerable. So unless you have special reason to trust your doctor you better come prepared when asking him for information so that he will know that you are not some fool who he can easily milk. I would at least read documentation from the manufacturers and maybe go for second opinions before taking any medication, especially if I am healthy and the medication is only preventive. Though honestly, I would really only take medication if I was sick, but for some that is just taking it too far.
 
After decades I finally figured out that basic painkillers were causing severe pain in my neck. Reason: in my drugged sleep I would rotate less. Same thing for antihistamines. Geezus. Glad I finally cracked myself. Yay..

My point is we don't understand the vast and varied consequences of this junk. (yes: we become junkies)

Avoid pharmaceuticals - they are black magik. And if you do take them be sensitive an honest to how you react <- almost impossible, i know.

Needless to say avoid taking multiple drugs at the same time. You won't realise how fucked up they make you with a non-scientific method. This is why they prescribe cocktails. I quit alcohol and soon realised how much my beloved mary jane was hurting me too. Now I just read books..

Anyway..

I'm getting the vaccine next week. Not sure which one. Don't care. I'm afraid if i don't my freedom will be restricted further. I want to travel to visit my parents asap.
 
I'm getting the vaccine next week. Not sure which one. Don't care. I'm afraid if i don't my freedom will be restricted further. I want to travel to visit my parents asap.
I heard there's not going to be a hard requirement, if you can't prove vaccination or having had COVID-19 they will require a negative test (some days in advance, I guess) but let you travel too. But it may change from country to country (and most likely from time to time), so do not trust this much.
Btw. What happened to that variant from Brittany that escaped tests ? Have they updated the tests, didn't it spread from the first cases or is there any update ?
 
At the end of the first paragraph it says "28 days"! You know what that means?
That those should be some long holidays... You can always use the long vacation there to learn to dance better...
 
I heard there's not going to be a hard requirement, if you can't prove vaccination or having had COVID-19 they will require a negative test (some days in advance, I guess) but let you travel too. But it may change from country to country (and most likely from time to time), so do not trust this much.
Btw. What happened to that variant from Brittany that escaped tests ? Have they updated the tests, didn't it spread from the first cases or is there any update ?
Personally I expect that people will be practically forced to take vaccines. I do not think that it will be officially mandated where I live, but I expect that if you do not take it then you will be a second-class citisen and your life will be made very difficult. In practice that is the same as making it mandatory. In both cases people have to take it because otherwise they will be punished. We just call it differently and the punishment differs.
 
Personally I expect that people will be practically forced to take vaccines. I do not think that it will be officially mandated where I live, but I expect that if you do not take it then you will be a second-class citisen and your life will be made very difficult. In practice that is the same as making it mandatory. In both cases people have to take it because otherwise they will be punished. We just call it differently and the punishment differs.
Oh, I'm not so optimistic. Forcing people to take vaccines means there'd be vaccines for everyone. I think they'll struggle to vaccinate all willing people with the full regimen before they have to change the vaccine and start over, so they won't bother pressing very hard. If they ever make progress and start forcing people to take vaccines then they'll eventually find outbreaks despite the vaccination, so it's going to be hard to justify, and they'll go back to require tests (as long as tests work). Pfizer is already talking of a third dose after a year, while many coutries are considering the UK policy of giving only first doses and delaying the second one. How many states will be able to give 2 doses to everyone in 1 year in time for the third? The vaccination campaign will end up a yearly effort like 10 or 20 times bigger than the flu vaccination, but not reaching everyone. Vaccinating everyone every year is insanely expensive and we don't have a economic system that prioritises public health. And there is going to be more people willing to vaccinate as time goes on, so the effort to force the few remaining people to take a vaccine in short supply will be moot soon.

I mean they're hardly managing to force people to wear masks, which is much more easy to see how it prevents contagion and that it doesn't hurt, and compliance is clearly visible without electronic magic or paperwork or false certificates...

But it is too soon to tell. Whatever they'll decide they'll change it a few times. I mean, we don't know how long natural immunity after infection lasts, how long vaccine protection lasts or how often variants will show up that pose challenges about existing immunity.
If a couple of shots were enough to protect one person for life, then yes, authorities, multinationals, or societies would eventually force people to take them in more or less subtle ways. But I'm not sure of that (or of the contrary).

I usually don't agree with your views on COVID-19 but you're right that not taking a vaccine is a gift to others who can use the dose. And I guess it'll stay so, because there won't be enough vaccines and nurses. I wish you didn't think yourself immune and take precautions so that you don't give away SARS-CoV-2 too, but just as you get away with your general health upkeep without COVID-19 specific measures, you'll get away living without a vaccine (unless COVID-19 kills you, which I hope not).
 
I wish you didn't think yourself immune and take precautions so that you don't give away SARS-CoV-2 too,
Actually, I do not consider myself immune and I do take precautions. I do not act like a germophobe but basic precautions to not infect vulnerable people with viruses have been necessary for as long as I live. I do follow all the usual precautions, that were necessary long before CoViD-19 due to viruses such as the flu virus.

I usually don't agree with your views on COVID-19 but you're right that not taking a vaccine is a gift to others who can use the dose.
It is more a half-joke that I sometimes use to hint at a contradiction of people who claim there to be a vaccine shortage and claim that I am killing people by not taking the vaccine; thus implying, probably without realising it, that the vaccine works better for someone if other people take it then if he takes it himself—which is a ridiculous implication of people trying to have their cake and eat it too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top