Covid Vaccines

[vitdoc]

Please tell me you are not really a doc.

Yes I went to medical school and did an internship and residency and fellowships. And prior to med school got a masters in applied physics. Both at a very prestigious university. So I really have a tough time listening to irrational nonsense. Also as I said much of what Fauci has said has been spot on. As things develop more information becomes available and things like percentages for herd immunity may change.
So if that is what you are dumping on Fauci for then you better dig deeper.
I have said all I plan to on this topic since I doubt it will influence anyone who wants to believe otherwise.
Enjoy Tucker.

 

[Chuck C]

Please tell me you are not really a doc.

Yes, Vitdoc is a real doctor and a surgeon. He is one of the most knowledgeable members on this forum and always a voice of reason, approaching all issues from a combination of his training, medical experience and experience as a valve surgery patient. Why would you say such a thing?

 

[Critter]

Essentially some non-vaxers are being culled out unnecessarily by the virus. If you get your vaccine ;even if you get covid19, you won’t die (maybe). At least it hasn’t happened to my knowledge. Don’t be a fool the nanites in the vaccine won’t hurt.

 

[Keithl]

US Deaths from Covid-19 (Current). Where is this uptick in deaths?

View attachment 887967

you would have to expand the last 3-7 days, the uptick is compared to the rolling 10-30 day numbers. In LA they had 30 in hospital 3 weeks ago, now they have almost 150. Those going into hospital are in worse condition than those months ago due to delta. The percentage of deaths for hospital patients is higher now than in the past.

 

[Keithl]

The numbers speak volumes:

" “breakthrough” infections in fully vaccinated people accounted for fewer than 1,200 of more than 107,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations. That’s about 1.1%. "

" And only about 150 of the more than 18,000 COVID-19 deaths in May were in fully vaccinated people"

https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-941fcf43d9731c76c16e7354f5d5e187
Statistics that can't be ignored, yet, many sadly still will. It is very similar to someone who disregards the statistics for mortality once a person becomes symptomatic with severe aortic stenosis. The mortality graph becomes a cliff. Yet, we still see, on occasion, people who refuse to accept this statistic and refuse surgery.

Of the fully vaccinated people being hospitalized and dying almost all of those have immuno-compromised underlying conditions such as organ transplant patients. Those in reasonably good health even if they get it are not going in the hospital.

 

[Keithl]

The right wing wingnuts don't want anything to succeed in the US while they are not in power. The anti Fauci sentiment is laughable. That goes along with not losing the presidential election to Q anon etc.. Sure, early on Fauci made some mistakes about a variety of issues but these errors were based on the information available at the time. He corrected himself and in my mind has been nearly spot on the entire time. The last great leader was very informative about pushing Hydroxychloroquine , lack of mask wearing, exposing his Secret Service to his active infection and his musings on using cleaning agents internally.

The death rate currently has gone up but since many of the currently infected are younger it is not going up as fast as the case rate. As mentioned a variety of times those who are dying are nearly all non vaccinated. A significant number of those infected will have long term issues.

Why does the government of the US want to have people vaccinated? It is a nefarious scheme to kill them? Control them? Plant things in their brains?
Maybe the government wants to have the pandemic under control so we can get back to a relatively normal existence.
The jump in cases when masks were removed and indoor activity was restarted was not a surprise. I saw very few people masked up and I am sure that many were unvaccinated. So now all of us vaccinated and unvaccinated will have to deal with masks somewhat longer due to our friendly unvaccinated neighbors.

And yes vaccines don't cause variants. Variants develop from populations of viruses that MUTATE. The more active virus the more mutations. So it is primarily in the UNVACCINATED population that the variants are occurring.

If one recalls the surge in cases in India occurred shortly after there were a number of political and religious rallies across India. When India (or parts of) reduced gatherings and shut down the case rates started to drop. I know several Indian physicians that lost relatives in India to Covid. Not just a media event.

So please everyone get vaccinated so we can get on with our lives. Stop watching Tucker Carlson or at least believing anything he says.

I will watch how I say this, but other than those being vaccinated that have underlying health conditions that still make them vulnerable I say let Darwinism take its course. The government should stop paying for cold treatment for any eligible person that has not gotten vaccinated, after all those people want to do what they want, why should we pay for them. By the way, these anti government folks are the same people that complain about why the government did not help them in a natural disaster, you are either anti-government or not, they need to pick a stand and stick with it.

 

[Michael O]

I will watch how I say this, but other than those being vaccinated that have underlying health conditions that still make them vulnerable I say let Darwinism take its course.

I struggle with this on a daily basis. On the one hand, I think "I want the best outcomes for everyone, and this means we need to keep encouraging people to get vaccinated." It's difficult, however, to make people do things that are in their interest over their inclination. On the flip side, I think "oh screw 'em. Cleans the gene pool, cleans the voting pool". That feels very satisfying in a self-rightous sort of way, but it's not really who I aspire to be (most days). There's going to be a lot of frictional loss, in vaccinated but susceptible populations, in populations that want the vaccine who find it difficult to obtain, and in populations that are are allergic. Note that many people on these lists fall into the "more susceptible to bad outcomes" population. The best summation of why we should continue with encouraging vaccination efforts is "it will only help at the margins, but the margins are important".

The government should stop paying for cold treatment for any eligible person that has not gotten vaccinated,

I think private insurance will solve this problem, as they start to enforce higher rates for the non-vaccinated population, the same as they do w/ smokers/etc....

 

[Michael O]

"Herd immunity was accepted to be 70-75%. When polls showed only about 60% were willing to get vaccinated, Fauci suddenly claimed herd immunity was 80-85% to try to trick people into getting vaccinated."

Not really interested in arguing with rich, but I did want to pull this specific sentence out and talk about why herd immunity and vaccine effectiveness is important in the context of more virulent variants like Delta

Couple of quick definitions:

• The herd immunity threshold is achieved when there is sufficient immunity in the population such that each person who acquires the infection passes it on to less than one person on average. Surpassing this threshold will result in a decline in the incidence of that infection. This number is affected by a couple of things – how transmissible [edit: original post used the word "virulent" here incorrectly] the infection is, and how susceptible the population is to infection. The first is a characteristic of the infectious agent, and the second is significantly affected by the efficacy and commonality of a vaccine. Population susceptibility is also affected by things like some genetic immunity, for example, or by locking down populations to reduce potential transmission events. Whether you agree with them or not, the point of lockdowns was to buy time – reduce the spread of the virus until a vaccine could be developed. I’m going to say “virus/covid/delta/etc”, even though this is applicable to all infectious diseases.
• The comment calculation for HI based only on the transmissibility of the virus is 1-1/R, where R is the basic reproduction index- a measure of how transmissible the agent is. The original Wuhan variant had about a 2.5 R, Alpha (prevalent in the US up until recently) somewhere 3-4, smallpox around the time of eradication about 4, Delta about 6, Measles about 18.
• Thus, by math, the HI for Alpha is about 75%, but the HI for Delta is about 85%. Note that this is absent calculating the effect of vaccines on the susceptibility of the population.
• The formula for having a vaccine *alone* reach herd immunity is V (target vaccination level) = (1-1/R)/E, where E is the vaccine effectiveness against transmission.
• Delta is a problem for two reasons – both in the numerator and in the denominator. The top part of the calculation is higher for Delta b/c it’s a more transmissible [edit: original post used the word "virulent" here incorrectly] variation. That alone would make the vaccine’s task harder, even if the existing vaccines were just as effective against Delta as against earlier versions. The additional problem is that the evidence points to the current vaccines being somewhat less effective against transmission, although they still seem very effective against the severity of infection.
• With an earlier variant that had a R of 3, and an E of .95, the herd immunity from vaccines alone was 95% of 75% or about 71%.
• With Delta showing an R of 6, and an E of (lets say) .9, HI from vaccines alone pushes to nearly 95%

Short version: more transmissible [edit: original post used the word "virulent" here incorrectly] variations means that the HI number is higher, and would have to be accomplished either by a nearly universal vaccination rate (like w/ have w/ measles/smallpox) or by reducing the number of transmission opportunities (social activity pattern changes).

Apologies for going off on a tangent, but this talking point has really been bugging me.

 

[Chuck C]

It's amazing how sometimes it takes a near death experience to wake folks up.

On the flip side, I think "oh screw 'em. Cleans the gene pool, cleans the voting pool". That feels very satisfying in a self-rightous sort of way, but it's not really who I aspire to be (most days).

I understand the temptation to think that way and believe you are right to aspire to be better and glad you are able to do so, at least most days

On my wife's side of the family, there are a number of Covid-19 deniers and minimizers. Two uncle's died, almost certainly due to Covid, but the immediately families are deniers and are secretive about the official cause of death. But, both hospitalized with severe respiratory issues and put on ventilators, right during the height of Covid. You can put two and two together for what it probably was that took them out. Does the family learn? No. Instead they post dubious articles about how hospitals are lying about cause of death so that they can get extra funds by inflating the Covid deaths.

My in-laws were not so much Covid deniers, but certainly minimizers. Even at their old age they like hitting the bars and gather with friends. They never saw Covid as a threat, despite my wife's pleading with them to be cautious. Well, my father in law got really sick. So sick that he could not get out of bed. He refused to go to the hospital and almost died, all the while insisting that he just had a case of the flu. He was tested for Covid a week later and was positive. He and his wife have come around and have since been vaccinated. I get the Darwin argument, but the thing is despite their skewed views of the pandemic, I love them dearly and we were terribly worried that he would not pull through. It would have been a devastating loss, even if it was technically his own fault.

And, of course, there are some who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons. We have a friend with cancer in this position, and her doctor will not allow it. The deniers and conspiracy folks put vulnerable people like her at risk.

 

[cldlhd]

At the end of the day I really don't wish anybody gets infected, really sick, or worse dies. Especially those who can't get vaccinated for medical reasons or perhaps because of immune system reasons it's not as effective. But my biggest concern if I'm being honest is that me and my family and people I care about who are vaccinated are safe and that the vaccine resistant or refusers don't breed about a new variant that the vaccine is really ineffective against

 

[spartangator]

"Herd immunity was accepted to be 70-75%. When polls showed only about 60% were willing to get vaccinated, Fauci suddenly claimed herd immunity was 80-85% to try to trick people into getting vaccinated."

Not really interested in arguing with rich, but I did want to pull this specific sentence out and talk about why herd immunity and vaccine effectiveness is important in the context of more virulent variants like Delta

Couple of quick definitions:

• The herd immunity threshold is achieved when there is sufficient immunity in the population such that each person who acquires the infection passes it on to less than one person on average. Surpassing this threshold will result in a decline in the incidence of that infection. This number is affected by a couple of things – how virulent the infection is, and how susceptible the population is to infection. The first is a characteristic of the infectious agent, and the second is significantly affected by the efficacy and commonality of a vaccine. Population susceptibility is also affected by things like some genetic immunity, for example, or by locking down populations to reduce potential transmission events. Whether you agree with them or not, the point of lockdowns was to buy time – reduce the spread of the virus until a vaccine could be developed. I’m going to say “virus/covid/delta/etc”, even though this is applicable to all infectious diseases.
• The comment calculation for HI based only on the transmissibility of the virus is 1-1/R, where R is the basic reproduction index- a measure of how transmissible the agent is. The original Wuhan variant had about a 2.5 R, Alpha (prevalent in the US up until recently) somewhere 3-4, smallpox around the time of eradication about 4, Delta about 6, Measles about 18.
• Thus, by math, the HI for Alpha is about 75%, but the HI for Delta is about 85%. Note that this is absent calculating the effect of vaccines on the susceptibility of the population.
• The formula for having a vaccine *alone* reach herd immunity is V (target vaccination level) = (1-1/R)/E, where E is the vaccine effectiveness against transmission.
• Delta is a problem for two reasons – both in the numerator and in the denominator. The top part of the calculation is higher for Delta b/c it’s a more virulent variation. That alone would make the vaccine’s task harder, even if the existing vaccines were just as effective against Delta as against earlier versions. The additional problem is that the evidence points to the current vaccines being somewhat less effective against transmission, although they still seem very effective against the severity of infection.
• With an earlier variant that had a R of 3, and an E of .95, the herd immunity from vaccines alone was 95% of 75% or about 71%.
• With Delta showing an R of 6, and an E of (lets say) .9, HI from vaccines alone pushes to nearly 95%

Short version: more virulent variations means that the HI number is higher, and would have to be accomplished either by a nearly universal vaccination rate (like w/ have w/ measles/smallpox) or by reducing the number of transmission opportunities (social activity pattern changes).

Apologies for going off on a tangent, but this talking point has really been bugging me.

Thanks for sharing this, @Michael O, as it's key info for how the world moves forward (and @vitdoc for the dialogue as well as others for your diligence here).

As a public health researcher who often studies information/misinformation, I've been following this thread but not up to posting because so many of the claims are just exhausting, and there isn't emotional energy left to engage with willful ignorance.

That said, thank you for supporting each other and working to share accurate information that can save lives as we move together through the COVID era and hopefully past it one day as more people get vaccinated.

 

[Chuck C]

"Herd immunity was accepted to be 70-75%. When polls showed only about 60% were willing to get vaccinated, Fauci suddenly claimed herd immunity was 80-85% to try to trick people into getting vaccinated."

Not really interested in arguing with rich, but I did want to pull this specific sentence out and talk about why herd immunity and vaccine effectiveness is important in the context of more virulent variants like Delta

Couple of quick definitions:

• The herd immunity threshold is achieved when there is sufficient immunity in the population such that each person who acquires the infection passes it on to less than one person on average. Surpassing this threshold will result in a decline in the incidence of that infection. This number is affected by a couple of things – how virulent the infection is, and how susceptible the population is to infection. The first is a characteristic of the infectious agent, and the second is significantly affected by the efficacy and commonality of a vaccine. Population susceptibility is also affected by things like some genetic immunity, for example, or by locking down populations to reduce potential transmission events. Whether you agree with them or not, the point of lockdowns was to buy time – reduce the spread of the virus until a vaccine could be developed. I’m going to say “virus/covid/delta/etc”, even though this is applicable to all infectious diseases.
• The comment calculation for HI based only on the transmissibility of the virus is 1-1/R, where R is the basic reproduction index- a measure of how transmissible the agent is. The original Wuhan variant had about a 2.5 R, Alpha (prevalent in the US up until recently) somewhere 3-4, smallpox around the time of eradication about 4, Delta about 6, Measles about 18.
• Thus, by math, the HI for Alpha is about 75%, but the HI for Delta is about 85%. Note that this is absent calculating the effect of vaccines on the susceptibility of the population.
• The formula for having a vaccine *alone* reach herd immunity is V (target vaccination level) = (1-1/R)/E, where E is the vaccine effectiveness against transmission.
• Delta is a problem for two reasons – both in the numerator and in the denominator. The top part of the calculation is higher for Delta b/c it’s a more virulent variation. That alone would make the vaccine’s task harder, even if the existing vaccines were just as effective against Delta as against earlier versions. The additional problem is that the evidence points to the current vaccines being somewhat less effective against transmission, although they still seem very effective against the severity of infection.
• With an earlier variant that had a R of 3, and an E of .95, the herd immunity from vaccines alone was 95% of 75% or about 71%.
• With Delta showing an R of 6, and an E of (lets say) .9, HI from vaccines alone pushes to nearly 95%

Short version: more virulent variations means that the HI number is higher, and would have to be accomplished either by a nearly universal vaccination rate (like w/ have w/ measles/smallpox) or by reducing the number of transmission opportunities (social activity pattern changes).

Apologies for going off on a tangent, but this talking point has really been bugging me.

How dare you bring math and science into an emotional topic!

Excellent! Very helpful to understanding the changing HI targets Michael!

 

[sharky7]

WELL...WELL, here we go again, first i would say, I do not believe anything that the GOVT says, nothing! and that includes the USA govt!
So then, i read comments from both sides, yes we are still divided, will we stay divided, i hope this to not be the case. One MAJOR question had been raised and has been hidden by everyone with a voice in all of this, a voice people listen to, this question is HUGE and has not, of yet been answered, by anyone, cept those that are trying to hide it, and demean it, and make it go away. you see this with this NEW VARIANT going around, and WOW i scratch my head thinking, why and how is everyone seemingly able to miss this, i cannot be the smartest in the room, AM I?
NOPE of course not,
1. 'HAS THIS CHINA VIRUS, as of yet or even has the attempt been made, is there anyone out there still even trying to ISOLATE this VIRUS!' and if it has not been isolated, FACT is, we all are arguing about a big NOTHING SANDWICH! 2. Then it begs the second question, if this VIRUS have never been ISOLATED, then what is all this about a VACCINE for a virus from where, Alice in Wonderland, the Twilight Zone.......I mean what the hell is going on?
[and if you do not think this is not important enough to even consider, then you're a lost cause and a waste of my time, to those others that know it to be true and see what I am seeing, then it leads to a 3rd QUESTION.....WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON HERE, AND WHAT IS THIS REALLY ALL ABOUT, SURELY IT IS NOT ABOUT A "VIRUS"!]

 

[sharky7]

Yes I went to medical school and did an internship and residency and fellowships. And prior to med school got a masters in applied physics. Both at a very prestigious university. So I really have a tough time listening to irrational nonsense. Also as I said much of what Fauci has said has been spot on. As things develop more information becomes available and things like percentages for herd immunity may change.
So if that is what you are dumping on Fauci for then you better dig deeper.
I have said all I plan to on this topic since I doubt it will influence anyone who wants to believe otherwise.
Enjoy Tucker.

K then, i pose this QUESTION to you, seems no one else seems to know.
Has this CHINA VIRUS been isolated yet, are there any that are still trying to even ISOLATE it?
My sources indicate that it has not, are you able to show me where it has been isolated? [ALSO inform all here why that is a question that needs answers before anything else is even debated, or discussed. if it hasnt been, then there is no Virus to even have one word about, right VITDOC?]

 

[Chuck C]

i cannot be the smartest in the room, AM I?
NOPE of course not,

I think I found one of your points on which I agree with you.

 

[Michael O]

Sigh - edited my original post to update a few incorrect instances of the word "virulent".

@Chuck C - Plus, it let me use " numerator" and "denominator" for the first time in 30 years....

@spartangator - thank you. I'm mostly preaching to the folks on the margins who are making good faith efforts to understand, but find clear explanations difficult to find.

 

[Michael O]

Oh - re: people trying to field the "has it been isolated?" question. This is not a meaningful question. The genetic sequencing for Covid-19 and its variants has been established and published by a number of sources.

Don't bother with this question - it's not offered in good faith.

 

[Chuck C]

Credit to Pellicle for digging up this gem, but it seems perfect at the moment:

 

[Chuck C]

Plus, it let me use " numerator" and "denominator" for the first time in 30 years....

Excellent usage indeed!
It really added to how knowledgeable you came across.

 

[Michael O]

Trying to bring this thread back on topic somewhat.

For some people considering upcoming surgeries, your local Covid rates and the size of your chosen hospital's ICU can factor into your choice of provider. My local regional hospital is good, but one of the factors that impacted my decision to go to a much larger hospital 5 hours away was the size/capability of their ICU. The local hospital has a limited number of ICU beds, and with a rising infection rate in surrounding counties, I didn't want to take the chance that my surgery would be delayed due to the beds being filled. 91-divoc.com can provide county level info on case rates.