NorthHawk wrote:One of the big questions about the vaccines is if those that are fully vaccinated can spread the virus. I was listening to a virologist who was saying we should all be wearing masks even after the 2nd dose because we don't know if we become unwitting carriers and may affect others
who haven't yet been vaccinated. As he explained it I inferred that he was saying we could be vaccinated but actually have the virus but be symptom free but they are not yet sure if that's the case or if we just become like I said carriers. That will take a lot longer to figure out and we may not get a complete and accurate picture until well after this virus has been contained and studied more.
NorthHawk wrote:How true. Just look at people wanting antibiotics for the flu even though they aren't effective against viruses.
RiverDog wrote:That's what I don't understand about the objections of these anti vaxxers. At some point, you have to trust the person, company, and regulatory agency that's selling you what ever it is you're consuming even if it's a bottled water or fruits and vegetables, that they handled it with care and didn't either knowingly or unknowingly introduce something into it that could make you sick. Why is it that they mistrust Moderna, Pfizer, and the FDA yet don't even think twice about the mom and pop winery or the street vendor selling sausages?
RiverDog wrote:That's what I don't understand about the objections of these anti vaxxers. At some point, you have to trust the person, company, and regulatory agency that's selling you what ever it is you're consuming even if it's a bottled water or fruits and vegetables, that they handled it with care and didn't either knowingly or unknowingly introduce something into it that could make you sick. Why is it that they mistrust Moderna, Pfizer, and the FDA yet don't even think twice about the mom and pop winery or the street vendor selling sausages?
Aseahawkfan wrote:Trust? That's funny. Trust is partisan now. Everything is partisan now. You believe who is on your side, sometimes not even that. The amount of partisan hate is bad. These two sides just casually toss every insult at each other for every terrible crime in history like it's nothing. The meaning behind the majority of these words don't even have impact any more they are so casually tossed out when referencing the opponent.
Science has become like religion. You can find someone to support whatever you believe and make it sound like science. Since the vast majority don't understand science including how to interpret studies or data that it's pretty easy to push a theory absent any quality evidence.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Best we can all do is try to break down the science for people who are hesitant. I'm fortunate in that both of my parents worked in the medical field and at least respect medical science, especially my father who influences my stepmother. My mother has massive respect for doctors. So that part is good. But my buddy's sister tried to get their mom not to take the vaccine and my buddy was like STFU, she is taking it. I'm glad most of my Republican buddies and Trump supporters aren't anti-vaxxers.
RiverDog wrote:The trust thing isn't all partisan. Donald Trump has come out for it, even wanted them to name it the "Trump Vaccine." Minorities, many of whom vote Democratic, have a huge problem trusting in the science of vaccines. And it's not just blacks that have a history of being used as the government's Guinea pigs. Hispanics are also more reluctant to get a jab than their white counterparts.
I know a number of people that aren't getting the vaccine. One of my neighbors, a devout Mormon, isn't getting it. Some of my friends from my former employer are very hesitant.
I have mixed emotions about the vaccine passports that some states have come out and banned. I can see the logic in banning them as it is an invasion of our privacy to force us to disclose what kind of medicines we have received, and I can understand the fear of the governments or private employers encroaching even further into our private lives.
But this is an exception. This disease is easily transmitted and almost unavoidable w/o a major change in our lifestyle. The government and private entitles have an obligation to protect their citizens, their employees, and their customers. This is a topic needs to be talked about on the national stage as part of a review of our strategies in dealing with the next pandemic.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Latins and folk of African descent have a hard time trusting the establishment, since they been screwed over and forgotten about so much. And there is also the education part of it.
Not like Latins and folk of African descent have any reason to trust Democrats either.
Aseahawkfan wrote:We discussed this some time back. The government can require vaccination or deny access to services like travel.
Aseahawkfan wrote:As long as we get to 70 or 80% vaccination with a 90% plus efficacy vaccine, our numbers should drop like a rock. That's what I'm waiting to see. Otherwise, these 90% rates are inaccurate and full of crap. So we'll see in time.
NorthHawk wrote:On another positive note, there have been some cases where some Long Haulers have had their symptoms reduced or disappear after the vaccination. Let's hope that it turns out to be a benefit to all of those with lingering conditions from this virus.
NorthHawk wrote:We can hope that Spring and Summer can have a positive effect in the fight against Covid and its variants along with the vaccines.
Maybe things will be largely back to normal by fall.
Aseahawkfan wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orFHqNwz4kQ
Good information on vaccination and variants. Looks like Israel at 56% vaccination rate has dropped substantially in cases and deaths.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Well, that sucks. I don't want no clotting. I need to get that Moderna.
NorthHawk wrote:I'm not convinced following the science is just a slogan. The other side of the coin is politicians overruling scientists - and we know how much politicians like to meddle to their perceived benefit. America has enough vaccine to not have to worry about supply so a pause until it's figured out how and who is susceptible to clotting is in my opinion a prudent move.
NorthHawk wrote:I heard a comment yesterday that it might be just women who have recently given birth, and if so, that's a valid piece of information and worthwhile for the purpose of administrating the vaccines safely. Whether it's just an anomaly in that cohort or if there is some increased risk it needs to be determined.
If that were the case, then why not just issue a precaution for women 18-48? The odds of a woman having blood clotting issues from birth control medications is much higher than from the J&J vaccine:
If that were the case, then why not just issue a precaution for women 18-48? The odds of a woman having blood clotting issues from birth control medications is much higher than from the J&J vaccine:
NorthHawk wrote:That's why there's a pause for this one vaccine, they don't know yet.
NorthHawk wrote:There are other vaccines that can be used, but they have to confirm or discover why it's happening and if it's worth the risk. Nobody should want a politician overruling the data. That was tried and look how it turned out.
NorthHawk wrote:Is Biden going too far to be the Anti-Trump? Maybe and probably, but that may not be a bad thing when lives might be at stake.
Hawk Sista wrote:There is no big impact to the # of vaccines given in the projected timeframe as our supply is so substantial that we have begun discussions about what to do with the excess. Biden is not perfect, but coming down so harshly on him for not over ruling the FDA seems a bit of a reach. There may be a link to women on birth control was my thought. It’s only impacted women who are of the age to use it.
c_hawkbob wrote:This is not a Biden Pause, it's a CDC/FDC pause. Biden has not yet overridden the science in this (the pandemic) regard, why should he now? He vowed during campaigning that he would "follow the science", knocking him at all for doing so now is misplaced IMO.
c_hawkbob wrote:You seem to be assuming that this pause is a mistake. Who, among Biden's scientific advisors has came out against it?
c_hawkbob wrote:Fauci says it'll only last a few days and that: "At the end of the day, it could actually diminish hesitancy by saying, 'Boy, those people they are looking at that very carefully, and when they say something's safe you can believe it’s safe".
c_hawkbob wrote:I'm just not seeing a reason for Biden to buck the science now.
c_hawkbob wrote:"Bucking the science" is 100% what we're talking about! You think he should. He said he wouldn't, I'm glad he's not. Even if I do wish they'd never pushed the pause button in the first place.
c_hawkbob wrote:Oh stop it. You are too saying he should buck the science as it is the 'science' (in the Federal government the directors of the CDC and FDC are the science!) pushed the button in the first place and you want him to unpush it! All these contortions you're going through to make it look otherwise are ridiculous,
c_hawkbob wrote:Sorry Riv but you're completely up in the night on this and I'm really not sure why. Biden said he would follow the advice of the medical and scientific experts as a clear contrast to Trump using "these metrics" (pointing at his empty head). Are you mad because he's following the advice of the medical and scientific experts within the government? Whose advice do you think he should be following? China's? You Tube's? Take a poll?
I'm not even arguing about the advice itself, in fact have said that I personally wish they had never pushed the pause button in the first place. Makes no sense to me.
And BTW, I am electricity!
NorthHawk wrote:Here's where I differ from your viewpoint:
You say the President should let science rule the decisions. His science advisers say to pause the rollout for a vaccine (other scientists may disagree, but his science advisers say it's the safest course of action). You now want the President to overrule his science advisers and take the viewpoint of others who disagree with his hand picked counsel.
How is that any different from the former Presidents taking outside viewpoints over his own scientists? It isn't - outside of taking advice from the My Pillow guy.
There might be nothing to worry about with the vaccines that have clotting issues. But is it worth ANY life when alternate supply is plentiful?
Most of us believe it's a better decision to err on the side of caution, maybe for a while - maybe forever if lives might be at stake when it's not necessary
to put people at risk.
I do not feel that the decision to place a complete pause on the J&J vaccine roll out placed enough weight on the impact this will have over vaccine hesitancy both here in the US as well as abroad. I also do not think that they gave fair consideration to a very reasonable, science based alternative, which would have been to at least temporarily stop using this vaccine on women 18-48 while allowing men and older women, whom have experienced no severe side effects, to continue to receive the vaccine.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 138 guests