The vaccinated are more likely to catch Covid

[noenegdod]

So, if I am understanding you properly, it is not our responsibility to wear a mask or take preventative measures to protect those who might be more susceptible to a reduction in lifespan?

Correct. If an able bodied person is at risk, it is up to them to build a bubble around themselves to protect themselves. If a disabled individual requires protection, it is up to society to build a bubble around that person to protect them, not build a bubble around everyone else, restrict their freedoms and handicap society to protect the weak.

There are definitely plenty of moral systems that would support this but, at least in the US, that type of behavior isn't typically condoned.

There is a very noisy minority in the US that would agree with that. The rest of the US is busy working, being productive and are not pay enough attention to the direction the country is being pushed in by this whiny minority of well intentioned individuals that do not understand that the vast majority of people that they are trying to protected are experiencing the decline in health due to self neglect and abuse, not because of something that "happened to them". In the vast majority of cases it happened because of them.

It does remind me of the Louis CK bit about children and allergies. If we continue to perpetuate flawed genes and keeping people alive to reproductive ages some bad things could happen before we have the technology to undo them... then again maybe one of the bedridden will have the focus and drive due to their situation to come up with the next formula or breakthrough that propels the human race forward.

I agree with almost everything Jordan Peterson has to say. This is the one thing I strongly disagree with him on. His belief is that all life has value (which I agree with) and that the more people we have around the better as there are more people around to solve the problems we have. The problem I see with that thinking is that it is a perpetual loop. X number of people will present Y number of problems. Having 2X people may solve the Y number of problems but 2X the people now present a completely different set of problems so the answer now becomes having 4X the people? Then eventually the answer becomes elon musk and Mars? You do realize that there is no way 7 billion people are leaving earth, right? The concept of Mars (or another solution involving abonnement of earth and the mess here) is a potential continuation of human kind but is a dead end for essentially everyone on earth including the weak you proport to care so much about.

At the end of the day, life is difficult and everyone wants to be saved and protected. That is what motivates most people to adopt this way of thinking. "If I protect them, they will protect me" instead of "I will be strong, contribute to society". There is a huge difference between protecting the elderly (for a few years) that contributed to building and protecting society and spending tremendous resources protecting someone for their entire lifetime. Why does it seem that everyone that advocates for the latter is usually relying on someone else to do the work?

 

[Shale MacGregor]

Correct. If an able bodied person is at risk, it is up to them to build a bubble around themselves to protect themselves. If a disabled individual requires protection, it is up to society to build a bubble around that person to protect them, not build a bubble around everyone else, restrict their freedoms and handicap society to protect the weak.

I don't disagree that people should protect themselves, the issue seems to boil down to active vs passive protection? Or their freedom vs yours?

I believe this is what Mia was driving at with her road example earlier. As a society we do have limitations put on our freedoms in order to dictate what happens when freedoms overlap. The question then becomes where is that line? It gets into the areas of moral virtues vs moral obligations and I think that is what trips a lot of people up.

I do get your point about the noisy majority, but when it comes to drawing a line in the sand refusing to wear a mask seems like an odd place to make a stand.

 

[noenegdod]

I don't disagree that people should protect themselves, the issue seems to boil down to active vs passive protection? Or their freedom vs yours?

I believe this is what Mia was driving at with her road example earlier. As a society we do have limitations put on our freedoms in order to dictate what happens when freedoms overlap. The question then becomes where is that line? It gets into the areas of moral virtues vs moral obligations and I think that is what trips a lot of people up.

I do get your point about the noisy majority, but when it comes to drawing a line in the sand refusing to wear a mask seems like an odd place to make a stand.

You seem to be more reasonable and logical than Mia so Im going to engage to see if there is room to understand.

The "only person on the road" comment from Mia was just stupid. Nothing I said indicated I believed I was the only person on the road. What Mia was driving at and I have a problem with is that she seems to believe that everyone deserves to be integrated into society at any cost. I flat out do not and will not ever agree with this. There is a base line competence, skill and ability that is required and if you dont meet that, get the hell out of the way. It is the same thing with health. If you are unhealthy and afraid for your life, chances are you are in that position because you made poor choices and/or were lazy and I quite literally do not care about your feelings or loss of freedoms and I will not accept limitations being imposed on me because you failed to look after yourself. I am however willing to pay to support you while you are in a bubble, so go in the bubble and get the f@$k out of my way so I can get to work and keep paying for your protection (and enjoying my freedom as a result of actually looking after myself).

Personally I find the masking issue a stupid one. Just put a mask on when you go in a store. Everyone was up in arms about seat belts 50 years ago, now it seems stupid not to. The issue seat belts helped was not going away so seat belts have stuck around. Masking will go away in a year or two.

 

[Shale MacGregor]

You seem to be more reasonable and logical than Mia so Im going to engage to see if there is room to understand.

The "only person on the road" comment from Mia was just stupid. Nothing I said indicated I believed I was the only person on the road. What Mia was driving at and I have a problem with is that she seems to believe that everyone deserves to be integrated into society at any cost. I flat out do not and will not ever agree with this. There is a base line competence, skill and ability that is required and if you dont meet that, get the hell out of the way. It is the same thing with health. If you are unhealthy and afraid for your life, chances are you are in that position because you made poor choices and/or were lazy and I quite literally do not care about your feelings or loss of freedoms and I will not accept limitations being imposed on me because you failed to look after yourself. I am however willing to pay to support you while you are in a bubble, so go in the bubble and get the f@$k out of my way so I can get to work and keep paying for your protection (and enjoying my freedom as a result of actually looking after myself).

Personally I find the masking issue a stupid one. Just put a mask on when you go in a store. Everyone was up in arms about seat belts 50 years ago, now it seems stupid not to. The issue seat belts helped was not going away so seat belts have stuck around. Masking will go away in a year or two.

Don't get me started on seat belts. I lost 1/3 of my weeks pay via a fine because I had hopped in and out of my car and forgot to buckle back up, our state doesn't require any other infractions to take your money just visually think you dont have your belt on.

I believe I understand your point, it is just the degree that I am not clear on. Shutting down the economy, causing real fiscal loss to my business seemed like an unreasonable step. Forcing people to take something into their body in order to reduce risk to others, in most cases, seems like an overstep. Asking people to follow basic protocols to prevent airborne pathogen spread in public, however, seems reasonable in most cases. That being said I would consider mask wearing a moral virtue rather than a moral obligation, if the person who is deciding whether or not to wear the mask considers it any type of health risk or non-trivial impediment to them living their daily life.

Societal rules and laws in general tend to settle into a max/min scenario maximize freedoms while minimize deleterious effects those freedoms might have on others in society.

Unfortunately this has gone into an all or nothing territory, which, while I respect people standing up for principles, is usually counterproductive in a society with varied opinions and moral systems.

I think it is a virtue that you are willing to pay to keep people alive in their bubble... I personally find it horrific what we spend in terms of resources and time keeping people alive for a few years longer when those resources could do more net-good elsewhere.

 

[noenegdod]

Don't get me started on seat belts. I lost 1/3 of my weeks pay via a fine because I had hopped in and out of my car and forgot to buckle back up, our state doesn't require any other infractions to take your money just visually think you dont have your belt on.

Get a camera, that is the only way you will be able to defend against the word of a police officer in court.

I believe I understand your point, it is just the degree that I am not clear on. Shutting down the economy, causing real fiscal loss to my business seemed like an unreasonable step. Forcing people to take something into their body in order to reduce risk to others, in most cases, seems like an overstep. Asking people to follow basic protocols to prevent airborne pathogen spread in public, however, seems reasonable in most cases. That being said I would consider mask wearing a moral virtue rather than a moral obligation, if the person who is deciding whether or not to wear the mask considers it any type of health risk or non-trivial impediment to them living their daily life.

The degree is this: I believe in personal accountability and responsibility. If you climb a mountain and your rope breaks and you need medical attention, you should be responsible for carrying insurance and/or paying for your rescue and medical attention. The same goes for any activity. Riding a bike, flying a kite, or shopping at the grocery store.

You should be making sure you are safe. Of course, it is the grocery stores responsibility to make sure you are not having shelves falling on you but it is up to you to assess your personal risk and act accordingly. If you are a type 2, overweight, have CV disease, and run out of breath on the way to the fridge between commercials, you have a dramatically higher risk and should be taking steps to protect yourself. On the other end of the scale (I am 48), I generally turn off all screens 2 hrs before bed, I have a bedtime routine, I usually have an outstanding sleep and wake up without an alarm. Everyday almost without fail my heart rate is somewhere between 140 and 180 for a minimum of 30 to 60 min. I, as a rule (there are always exceptions) dont eat fast food, soft drinks, processed foods, coffee, alcohol, sugar, cakes...... the list is huge. I do eat whole, unprocessed fresh foods.

I refuse to do all that work (and a lot more) to look after myself and then have to further limit and restrict myself to "protect" someone else who was living the life of indulgence and gluttony. I dont care how tired you are at the end of the day, I dont care about your circumstances. Your life style and environment is a choice and you can change your circumstances if it was important enough. Problem for most, it doesn't become important enough until the challenge looks impossible to them and they just give up.

IMO everything should have been left alone. No lockdowns, no closures. Period. Every "vulnerable" or fearful person who wanted to should have been isolated and protected. Anyone who opted to continue life as usual or in some self imposed modification of "the norm" would do so at their own risk, knowing full well that hospital services may not be available to them after a set number of beds were full, people with "preexisting conditions" included.

Societal rules and laws in general tend to settle into a max/min scenario maximize freedoms while minimize deleterious effects those freedoms might have on others in society.

Unfortunately this has gone into an all or nothing territory, which, while I respect people standing up for principles, is usually counterproductive in a society with varied opinions and moral systems.

At least part of what is going on is communism. It has been to long ago that it was a concern and a lot of people have forgotten. Society has swung away form individualism and is now supporting what is in the best interests of the crowd. "Not a good decision for you? Too bad. This is what is happening."

I think it is a virtue that you are willing to pay to keep people alive in their bubble... I personally find it horrific what we spend in terms of resources and time keeping people alive for a few years longer when those resources could do more net-good elsewhere.

Believe me, it is not a virtue and it is not done willingly, I misspoke. I tolerate it as opposing it would take far more work and loss of income then simply allowing the powers that be to take the money from me and spend it as they see fit. I am offended by the fact that useless waste of skin people are given my money so they can exist, but I tolerate it.

 

[el-guapin]

The vaccine does not prevent the infection, it just lessens the severity to a common cold.

People who are vaccinated, including me, are probably more likely to be less careful about getting the infection.. I know that before I was vaccinated, I would wear a mask, use sanitizer, keep my distance from others, etc..

Now that I'm vaccinated, I just ignore all those extra precautions... and I'm just your average person so I assume if I behave that way, others probably do as well.

I still wash my hands a lot, but I always did that..

Well said!

 

[Hedges]

More contrarian opinions:

"Counterintuitively, he expects the hardest-hit and most vulnerable populations last time to enjoy the best protection now because they have built up a natural immunity. So areas like Los Angeles, which had disproportionate levels of infections, hospitalizations and deaths, are likely to be protected from a surge."

"By contrast, Klausner expects the San Francisco Bay Area, with higher levels of vaccinations but fewer illnesses, is "going to be potentially the most susceptible to a surge because their immunity ... is mostly derived from vaccination, which we have learned is actually not as strong and durable as immunity that is acquired after infection.”"

California virus cases stop falling, governor urges caution

California Gov. Gavin Newsom rolled up his sleeve Wednesday and received a coronavirus vaccine booster shot, a move he encouraged others to take as the state heads into the time of year that in 2020 ushered in the deadliest spike of COVID-19 cases. Much has changed since then — 88% of those 18...

news.yahoo.com

 

[robby]

More contrarian opinions:

"Counterintuitively, he expects the hardest-hit and most vulnerable populations last time to enjoy the best protection now because they have built up a natural immunity. So areas like Los Angeles, which had disproportionate levels of infections, hospitalizations and deaths, are likely to be protected from a surge."

"By contrast, Klausner expects the San Francisco Bay Area, with higher levels of vaccinations but fewer illnesses, is "going to be potentially the most susceptible to a surge because their immunity ... is mostly derived from vaccination, which we have learned is actually not as strong and durable as immunity that is acquired after infection.”"

California virus cases stop falling, governor urges caution

California Gov. Gavin Newsom rolled up his sleeve Wednesday and received a coronavirus vaccine booster shot, a move he encouraged others to take as the state heads into the time of year that in 2020 ushered in the deadliest spike of COVID-19 cases. Much has changed since then — 88% of those 18...

news.yahoo.com

Very hard to gauge that one because people who have gotten Covid and came through unscathed already have a naturally better immune systems than the other 20% of people who would have had severe symptoms. Most people who have a bad case of Covid get Vaccinated not long after they recover. Figuring out what would have happened to any particular individual is literally guess work. Most Covid cases outcomes are very dependent on the amount of Viral load you inhale. Vaccinated people who are infected will most often have a very low viral load so transmission from them is much less than an unvaccinated Covid individual who is festering in the virus.

At the end of the day it is obvious that as more and more people become vaccinated the amount of infected people will be be predominantly vaccinated people. Where else is the virus going to go!

Places like the UAE give a good indication of how this will finally end. They got a leap on most countries in the vaccination drive and now have 97% of the population vaccinated and 87% fully vaccinated. With a population of 10 million they still have 90+ cases per day but only 1-3 people dying per day.

 

[pollenface]

As directed by the state government where I live (Western Australia) I have to be double dosed by the 1st of January to continue being employed.

Whether there's any proof of it being effective or not.

 

[Hedges]

Booster (3rd dose of most vaccines) is coming our way in the U.S. Mix n match apparently will be allowed; it gives stronger response.
I'm not so sure about getting that one - antibodies waning, but T-cells still working?
Having a dose (exposure) timed sufficiently long after the 1st dose (exposure) might be the key to lasting immunity. Insufficient field data to be sure. We know the 3 weeks specified for Pfizer was rather short, and U.K. reported 12 weeks gave 3x as strong a response.

Your additional dose will give much higher antibody response. That much has been seen.
I think the booster trials for J&J raised it from 2/3 effective to 95%, similar to the mRNA after 2nd dose.

 

[MurphyGuy]

As directed by the state government where I live (Western Australia) I have to be double dosed by the 1st of January to continue being employed.

Whether there's any proof of it being effective or not.

LOL... It is effective or they wouldn't mandate it.

Why are people so irrational?

I have a very wealthy female friend who's a huge Trump supporter.. and she refused to get vaccinated. She has 4 kids, all between 20 and 30 years old now.
Like I said, she's very wealthy, measured in the 7 to 8 figures range, but its not her money, it was inherited.. her father was a big shot back in the 80's and 90's.

Anyhow, like I said, she won't get vaccinated for covid.. no way, no how.. not having it. But like I said, she's very wealthy and she, along with her kids and mother, have traveled all over the world and fill their home's with very expensive souvenirs. She has an 11 foot tall wood carving giraffe in her living room that cost something like $22,000 plus the shipping to get it here from Africa.

Her family has been to China, Russia, Africa, all over South America, Mexico, Australia, the Arctic circle, Greece, Turkey, Iceland, etc.. I don't think there's anywhere on the planet they haven't gone..

Have you ever traveled the world? I've done some traveling.. and the one thing that is universal for EVERYONE that goes traveling to exotic places??? = LOTS AND LOTS of vaccinations..

Go ahead, google "Required vaccinations for [enter exotic destination here]" and read the list..

She'll let them inject her with all kinds of vaccinations to go traveling, but won't get the covid vaccination.. ROFLMAO

I said she was wealthy, not smart..

 

[Daddy Tanuki]

LOL... It is effective or they wouldn't mandate it.

Why are people so irrational?

I have a very wealthy female friend who's a huge Trump supporter.. and she refused to get vaccinated. She has 4 kids, all between 20 and 30 years old now.
Like I said, she's very wealthy, measured in the 7 to 8 figures range, but its not her money, it was inherited.. her father was a big shot back in the 80's and 90's.

Anyhow, like I said, she won't get vaccinated for covid.. no way, no how.. not having it. But like I said, she's very wealthy and she, along with her kids and mother, have traveled all over the world and fill their home's with very expensive souvenirs. She has an 11 foot tall wood carving giraffe in her living room that cost something like $22,000 plus the shipping to get it here from Africa.

Her family has been to China, Russia, Africa, all over South America, Mexico, Australia, the Arctic circle, Greece, Turkey, Iceland, etc.. I don't think there's anywhere on the planet they haven't gone..

Have you ever traveled the world? I've done some traveling.. and the one thing that is universal for EVERYONE that goes traveling to exotic places??? = LOTS AND LOTS of vaccinations..

Go ahead, google "Required vaccinations for [enter exotic destination here]" and read the list..

She'll let them inject her with all kinds of vaccinations to go traveling, but won't get the covid vaccination.. ROFLMAO

I said she was wealthy, not smart..

is she single? would she make a good sugar momma? inquiring minds want to know....

 

[Shale MacGregor]

Booster (3rd dose of most vaccines) is coming our way in the U.S. Mix n match apparently will be allowed; it gives stronger response.
I'm not so sure about getting that one - antibodies waning, but T-cells still working?
Having a dose (exposure) timed sufficiently long after the 1st dose (exposure) might be the key to lasting immunity. Insufficient field data to be sure. We know the 3 weeks specified for Pfizer was rather short, and U.K. reported 12 weeks gave 3x as strong a response.

Your additional dose will give much higher antibody response. That much has been seen.
I think the booster trials for J&J raised it from 2/3 effective to 95%, similar to the mRNA after 2nd dose.

What does stronger response mean? From the number of experts on the subject I can expect the vaccine to help me not get it, not help me not get it, make the symptons that like a cold, make no symptoms so I can super spread it, allow Bill Gates to track me, and sterilize me...

The US went from 8-9% of the population having antibodies to 85% in a period of 12 months. At this point it seems like boosters will be most useful for those at risk of severe infections rather than the general population.

 

[Hedges]

What does stronger response mean? From the number of experts on the subject I can expect the vaccine to help me not get it, not help me not get it, make the symptons that like a cold, make no symptoms so I can super spread it, allow Bill Gates to track me, and sterilize me...

The US went from 8-9% of the population having antibodies to 85% in a period of 12 months. At this point it seems like boosters will be most useful for those at risk of severe infections rather than the general population.

Measured antibody response.

As for the rest, you can see many "experts" spouting things. Some were grounded in previous vaccine outcomes ("pathogenic priming"), which were a valid concern and occur with other diseases, other vaccines, but obviously weren't what happened with Covid vaccines.
I also don't trust the statistics or advice given us by government and industry spokesmen. I try to reality-check claims from both sides, and err on the side of caution.

Pfizer schedule is dose #2 3 weeks after #1. But U.K. decided to put dose #1 in twice as many people right away, dose #2 12 weeks later when they received more. Comparing the two schedules they got 3x as many antibodies in the blood with 12 weeks. Normally 2-dose vaccines have been spaced much further apart, so 3 weeks was abnormally short.

Delaying second Pfizer vaccines to 12 weeks significantly increases antibody responses in older people - University of Birmingham

Antibody response in people aged over 80 is three-and-a-half times greater in those who have the second dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine after 12 weeks compared to those who have it at a three-week interval, finds a new study led by the University of Birmingham in collaboration with Public...

www.birmingham.ac.uk

Mixed doses produced higher antibody response in many cases (although, partly the results seem to show higher response if second dose is mRNA, regardless of which first dose.)

Mix-and-match booster shots beneficial in boosting SARS-CoV-2 immunity

Should you get a second dose of the same vaccine if you’ve received the one-dose Johnson & Johnson shot? According to new clinical trial results published on the preprint medRxiv* server, a booster shot of a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine may increase your chances of neutralizing severe acute...

www.news-medical.net

Yes, boosters most useful for those most at risk.
At this time I'm inclined to wait and see. And wear that mask some said would increase chances of catching and spreading covid.

 

[noenegdod]

Pfizer schedule is dose #2 3 weeks after #1. But U.K. decided to put dose #1 in twice as many people right away, dose #2 12 weeks later when they received more. Comparing the two schedules they got 3x as many antibodies in the blood with 12 weeks. Normally 2-dose vaccines have been spaced much further apart, so 3 weeks was abnormally short.

This is exactly what happened in Israel. Extremely high and rapid uptake of vaccine and a huge number of "break through" infections from following the recommended dosing schedule.

 

[Bob B]

Yeah ..... it's one of the things they failed to tell us .... that the antibodies from the vaccine fade significantly after 6 months.
All they wanted us to know was that there was an initial 95% or so immunity ...... They had to know from their testing that faded pretty quickly to around 30%.

Not communicating this kind of thing is why people don't trust them.

 

[mactech]

If they weren't mRNA vaccines and not shoved down my throat I would possibly get the vaccines if it showed efficacy.

Two relatives died after receiving their 2nd Pfizer shot, one within 12hrs, the other a couple of days. That's not a coincidence, IMO. I don't know of anyone that died from COVID.

CDC is now talking about a 4th shot for the immunocompromised.

Study what happened in the animal trials for these mRNA type vaccines after they were exposed to the virus, a large majority of them died.

I had COVID and recovered at 65 yrs of age. Quercetin, Vitamin D (lots of it), Vitamin C, Zinc and NAC worked well for me.

 

[Hedges]

Yeah ..... it's one of the things they failed to tell us .... that the antibodies from the vaccine fade significantly after 6 months.
All they wanted us to know was that there was an initial 95% or so immunity ...... They had to know from their testing that faded pretty quickly to around 30%.

Not communicating this kind of thing is why people don't trust them.

Despite the fading antibody response, protection against serious illness, hospitalization, and death holds up pretty well.
But breakthrough cases can have "Long Covid"

So I think the vaccine is good (longer than recommended time between dose #1 and #2). Continued precautions, too.

Two relatives died after receiving their 2nd Pfizer shot, one within 12hrs, the other a couple of days. That's not a coincidence, IMO. I don't know of anyone that died from COVID.

There does seem to be enough anecdotal evidence to raise concern.
But statistics do show relatively effective and safe overall.

Weighing data I've seen for Covid and for the Pfizer, I chose to get the shot. I read test results for that one.
Why the adverse outcomes which don't appear to be expected background results, I don't know. That is a concern.
When I saw VAERS results for death day of shot, day after etc., I realized number occurring day of shot was exactly the background rate for the population of age getting first shot. The reported deaths for day 2, day 3 etc. dropped way below expected death rate for that population.

Two people known to you, that seem to not be expected result. Unless they were of such age/health that death was expected any day. It can happen occasionally in the world (and then we hear about it), but I also have heard of serious (non-fatal) outcomes. We have to consider rate of such outcomes in a world without covid or vaccine, see if it is elevated now. I'm not sure.

Study what happened in the animal trials for these mRNA type vaccines after they were exposed to the virus, a large majority of them died.

And some of my early electronic designs burned up, before I got them right.
Early attempts at mRNA didn't work right. They figured out the problems and fixed it.
mRNA tests of 35,000 getting (Pifizer, Moderna) and 35,000 getting placebo did not show majority die or more die from shot than from placebo.

 

[Shale MacGregor]

If they weren't mRNA vaccines and not shoved down my throat I would possibly get the vaccines if it showed efficacy.

Two relatives died after receiving their 2nd Pfizer shot, one within 12hrs, the other a couple of days. That's not a coincidence, IMO. I don't know of anyone that died from COVID.

CDC is now talking about a 4th shot for the immunocompromised.

Study what happened in the animal trials for these mRNA type vaccines after they were exposed to the virus, a large majority of them died.

I had COVID and recovered at 65 yrs of age. Quercetin, Vitamin D (lots of it), Vitamin C, Zinc and NAC worked well for me.

You don't know anyone who died from COVID related complications, and you have two relatives that died almost immediately after receiving a vaccine, and you were fine after recovering from COVID?

I guess I don't blame you if those are your direct experiences, based on the vears database of those who died after receiving a shot, within 4 months regardless of reason, your family either has something that triggers based on vaccine, or just the ultimate random number generator came up twice for you.

 

[Bob B]

They just need to be HONEST with what they tell the public.

It is widely known now that some % of people .... especially healthy young people .... have had heart problems after getting the vaccine.
We know this because it has leaked out from other sources. We never heard a word about it from the officials who should have been telling us the straight facts.

Why did the 2 highest ranking members of the committee that had to approve the booster quit? They were pressured to approve the vaccine when they didn't think they had enough data to do it.
As soon as they quit, the booster recommendation got approved.
This is NOT the way things should be done and just feeds the growing suspicion.

I got the Moderna vaccine .... it seems that it doesn't fade quite as quickly as the Pfizer. So, I will be waiting and watching a while before I get a booster.