Maybe our resident anti-vaxxers can explain why they love regeneron but fear the vaccine. If we didn't run them all off.

You know those pesky problems of Death and people in intensive care, and people in hospital.

Way up on this time last year.

How do you even have the nerve to post ITT.

You flew into a absolute spittle flecked hysterical rage a few months ago just at the suggestion Delta might cause problems to the health system etc.

Check reality, your position on how events would unfold got absolutely nuked from orbit to a fine dust.

Even more so when we take into account vaccine potency declining over time, which their is a much bigger consensus on than 16.

You do realise that experts in other countries that have higher vaccination rates than USA have decided on booster shots?

Probably not.

The vast majority of which are unvaccinated, so how does the FDA's decision on not to recommend boosters for those already vaccinated affect that situation?

Eh stop conflating discussions.

All I said is we have more problems e.g. people dying and in hospital than this time last year.

You said what problems?

I cleared it up.

The booster decision is an other topic.

Yeh, it's a real mystery why there might be a lower bar for a treatment than a prophylactic.

They're mostly wrong in this instance, but its not a bad instinct to treat treatments and prophylactics differently.
The real question is why there hasn't been a massive effort to push monoclonal anti-bodies out to everyone who needs it.

I haven't read a ton about it, but it seems likely the correct course of action for at risk individuals is to get vaccinated, test if you suspect covid, and get an infusion asap if you test positive.

You wrote "Given the problems Delta has caused in high summer, my hunch is that this is a bad decision.", in response to the immediate posts above yours about the FDA's decision on booster shots. If you weren't responding to the FDA decision on booster shots then what decision were your responding to, since you now indicate the booster decision is another topic?

That percentage appears to be a blend of ages, the majority of which are > 65 years old. The FDA's recommendation against boosters are for < 65. Also, the study is based on hospitalizations, which may no longer be an accurate measure of serious illness (link).

That's good context. Thanks.

Sorry I made another post immediately after that and thought you were talking about that. My mistake.

I will conflate them then as it will make it easier.

UK is a highly vaccinated country.

In high Summer, we have been in a much worse situation in terms of deaths and hospitalisations than we were in Summer, last year, much much worse, despite the vaccinations.

If vaccine potency wanes in in the next few months, this waning will coincide with winter.

Winter puts more people in hospital anyway, we are probably going to have a bad flu season.

If Autumn/Winter manages to put more unvaxxed in hospital, which seems a reasonable non fear based possibility, you want to keep pressures on health care to a minimum.

One way of doing this is boosters.

Problems like having to ask the army to help your health care system.

I dont really get your take. Crowded hospitals are a problem for everyone, not just the unvaxed.



A scene playing out all across the UK to varying degrees, both my local hospitals have put elective surgeries on hold for example. If you read the scrolling info on the video it states Scotland has asked the military with help with its Ambulance service. This is in a highly vaccinated country whilst the weather is still fine.

I know you posted an magazine article about a study about how hospitalisations are over counted, but whilst numerous examples of stressed and over burdened health care systems can be found Im not sure how much stock to put in it, seeing the actual study itself could not hurt.

Right, but the hospitals are crowded disproportionately from unvaccinated individuals, so providing boosters without clear evidence that it reduces serious illness in the vaccinated is not a solution to the crowding issue.

As for the study, it's not that covid hospitalizations are over counted per se but that the covid hospitalizations as a proxy for serious covid illness may no longer be accurate. This is relevant when evaluating whether the vaccines' protection against serious illness is waning since covid hospitalizations have been the primary metric for measuring serious covid illness, including breakthrough cases.

UK.

Hospitalisations.
September 16


2021 118.29PM
2020 16.21

ICU
2021 14.95
2020 1.82

Deaths.
2021: 2.1
2020: 0.19

Those numbers would at least give me pause at ruling out boosters for under 65s. I know those are UK numbers but the general pattern is the same in USA.

Experts in the UK have set the line at 50, which to me seems a much more reasonable age.

If I had to put my money on which group of experts, medical professionals and policy advisors had got it correct at 50 v 65 I would bet heavily on those that chose 50.

The only caveat is information relating to whether vaccines are better in fresh arms rather than 3rd jab in already jabbed arms, and I imagine the position varies in USA to UK on that issue.

The good guys should have beaten them to the punch by spreading disinformation that the vaccine made their dicks swell. Supply would never be able to keep up with the demand.

My wife ate lunch outside yesterday with someone that tested positive for Covid. They sat next to each other. I guess our family needs to isolate and we should get tested monday. Time to drink water and eat my vitamins!

GL. Hopefully the fact that it was outdoors is the help you needed to dodge it.

Good thread on the collateral damage anti-vaxxers are wreaking.

The consensus is that antibodies in your nose go down. There is not consensus that this will happen to T-cell memory etc. which prevent serious illness (possibly ever), and there is not consensus (nor data) yet to support a strategy of giving < age 65 people a new shot every 6 months to prevent what is mostly going to be a "cold".

It's quite possible for example that at age 65+ the cell memory portion of the immune response (the more important part) was always weaker, and the reason we didn't see this before was because antibodies were also protecting those older people from infection period.

So it may be that older people will always need regular boosters, or it may be that the 3rd shot will be enough to give them permanent strong cell responses. And for younger people, occasionally getting the virus (which will then boost antibodies again) may be perfectly fine without ever needing a booster.

Yes no consensus, but you are posting like the 14 experts in FDA are the consensus. 2 out of the 16 voted for a different strat.

Experts in the UK set the booster age at 50 (USA 65), and for reasons I have already set out, this is where I would put my money at being closer to the optimum line in a vacuum of considerations relating to where it is best to put vaccine in terms of third shot for vaccinated or first shot for unvaccinated.

Forgot this one:

Big Keith Olbermann 2004 "Mr. Bush, sir, you are unfit to be President!" pissing into the wind energy on those tweets. Completely worthless, not helpful, make people feel as if they are taking political action by watching/reading/retweeting and being mad.

He also presents his family illness in a misleading way which has become very common, until the final tweet it seems like the infections were quite serious. Blue checks tweet "I did everything right, wore a mask, still got Delta" and get 200K likes; the tweets where they say it's very mild get buried and they're posting as normal all along. Not really sure why anti-vaxxers/anti-maskers would change their tune when the enlightened libs still want to pretend vaccination has changed nothing.

No ****ing clue what's "very discouraging" about completely asymptomatic infections in 80 year old at-risk people because of the success of the vaccine.

I think you missed the point of the tweets. He's complaining that the hospitals are overloaded.

Oh, yea, not apparent from the tweets that were posted here.

Full thread reads more like an indictment of the way hospitals are handling asymptomatic cases though. "Keith Olbermann 2004" still applies, literally nobody in the supposed antivax target audience is ever reading that or caring. Just get libs riled up for likes and RTs.

Might be more "Rachel Maddow 2017" actually, laborious story that eventually ties back to finger wagging at "you dumb poor red state people doing bad things". No mention whatsoever of the people with actual power (Trump, governors, Biden/Democrats for not passing a mandate, hospital admin, plus all the decades of political decisions from both sides that have rightly eroded trust in public institutions) who've brought us to this.

I honestly don't know what points you're trying to make. Might be easier if you used plain language rather than ironic references.