|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 14, 2021 10:23:34 GMT -6
As a parent of a 9 and 11 year old the vaccine for that age group is a problem/concern for me....(If) there does end up being an issue though our kids will have to deal with it their whole lives
CDC/FDA are running studies on vaccination for younger kids, I hope they can get that information out so people don't worry. I expect this to become as routine as flu vaccine.
The new vaccine technology has such promise to bring vaccines on line quickly that is at least some good news out of this year. Looks like we should be able to develop vaccines more quickly in the near future.
The short run is important mostly because we may still have a chance to prevent new variation which we are not really ready to handle in that short run. AND to prevent the hospital system being slammed.
Variation has been a theoretical problem I was discussing over this entire thread which is suddenly not so theoretical.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 14, 2021 11:05:25 GMT -6
See the link above about the Nevada parent who sent his kids to school Covid positive, knew it. 80 kids who had no choice or knowledge of the risk had to take the it, may have been hurt, not just one.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), there have been 337 pediatric COVID-19 related deaths since the pandemic began; approximately an 18 month period. Some 192 pediatric deaths associated with influenza were reported during the 2019-2020 flu season, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. www.masslive.com/news/2020/10/cdc-near-record-number-of-children-died-from-flu-during-2019-2020-season.htmlAdd in the last 6 months of the 2018-19 flu season and you probably have about the same number of deaths as the 337 due to Covid. How many of these kids got the flu from other children at school? Probably quite a few. How many years over the past 2 decades do you think they should have shutdown the educational system for influenza? Let's see what's wrong with your analysis .
In one flu season with the flu virus rampant we had 192 deaths. With Covid we had a winter season where many kids were not in school for much of the time and when in school were practicing effective mitigation. For that reason alone the comparison is bogus. Especially when to equate the two you take 18 months to aggregate the flu impact.
In addition you are comparing the deaths from last years Covid variation in talking about the threat this year. Delta is NOT the same.
In addition you focus only on children's death rate and not include serious illness.
And, finally you do not consider the danger to the adult population that children in school represent as a vector for community spread. Adults become more often severely ill than children and don't have as much immunity since they have no history with Covid.
THIS IS NOT JUST LIKE THE FLU. Your statistic is misleading and without context misinformation.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 14, 2021 11:16:59 GMT -6
How many years over the past 2 decades do you think they should have shutdown the educational system for influenza? I am not advocating shutting schools down. Not now, we don't have data, and in person schools are very important for kids. Except we have data to know Covid is NOT the flu.
What I am advocating is taking this threat more seriously than we are because it is different and a more dangerous Covid virus than last year. We are instead less cautious and it's probably a mistake. What I see from the statistic you cite is that we had a variant of the flu in 19-20 season (before last year's season) that was particularly dangerous to children in terms of fatalities, AND a vaccine that was less effective than usual.
LAST season starting in October 2020, after the article you cite was published, it appears we were lucky we had a lot of masking and other mitigation or kids might have had even more illness.
To me that statistic you cite has an entirely different message. First it is damned good reason to be concerned about Covid variations. They are far less understood and potentially much more dangerous. Second, we have to get people vaccinated with a good vaccine or we are toast. The reasons for caution in school are NOT just danger to the kids themselves. In fact kids still at this point seem mostly safe if they become ill. We should be cautious because we don't know. And the other big problem with the kids is they are a vector of spread to the general population.
The really important thing is what is different with Covid than the flu and there are several things different here.
First, the general population does not have generations of immunity built up to Covid, for flu the adult population that may be hurt by community spread is less vulnerable than for Covid. Second the delta variant appears to be MUCH more transmissible and at least as dangerous to children and adults, where the severity is much more severe to adults.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 14, 2021 20:09:34 GMT -6
Some 192 pediatric deaths associated with influenza were reported during the 2019-2020 flu season, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention....How many of these kids got the flu from other children at school? Probably quite a few. How many years over the past 2 decades do you think they should have shutdown the educational system for influenza? Probably rarely should we shut down because of the flu. There is some danger in the schools. Usually not so much in the general population. What Covid winter showed is we really should wear masks and distance more during flu season, or at least during local outbreaks.
We had a very quiet 20-21 flu season. Thanks for making me think about the flu a little more.
|
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Aug 14, 2021 21:20:28 GMT -6
We had a kid come to football practice tonight then start complaining about feeling bad.. He had recently learned he was diabetic. His mom took him to the hospital where he was given a precautionary covid test which came back positive.. So the team is risking quarantine kicker is my son sits at the same lunch table as him... quarantine is imminent
|
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Aug 14, 2021 23:37:01 GMT -6
Look people may have vaccine hesitancy but I doubt much if any of it has to do with politics. Get off it already. That is a remarkable statement. If you said it was not ONLY politics, I would agree.
But, saying not much is political?
And here's another explanation for you, halftime. A new report by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh has found that the most highly educated Americans are also the most vaccine hesitant. unherd.com/thepost/the-most-vaccine-hesitant-education-group-of-all-phds/The researchers canvassed no fewer than 5 million Americans who responded to surveys on whether they were “probably” or “definitely not planning on getting a COVID vaccine. It finds that the association between hesitancy and education level follows a U-shaped curve with the highest hesitancy among those least and most educated. People with a master’s degree had the least hesitancy, and the highest hesitancy was among those holding a PhD.” What’s more, the paper found that in the first five months of 2021, the largest decrease in hesitancy was among the least educated — those with a high school education or less. Meanwhile, hesitancy held constant in the most educated group; by May, those with Ph.Ds were the most hesitant group. So not only are the most educated people most skeptical of taking the Covid vaccine, they are also the least likely the change their minds about it… |
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Aug 15, 2021 0:03:03 GMT -6
Maybe some of those Ph.D's are concerned about the following: 1) According to Reuters, three new conditions have been reported by a small number of people after vaccination with jabs from Pfizer and Moderna. The ailments include Erythema multiforme, a form of allergic skin reaction; glomerulonephritis, or kidney inflammation; and nephrotic syndrome, a renal disorder that leads to heavy urinary protein losses. All of the cases are being studied by the EMA to determine whether the vaccines might be linked to the conditions. 2) The FDA now recognizes that the rare heart inflammation seen in some patients, including members of the military, have been linked to mRNA vaccines. So, with criticism and skepticism directed at the US-made vaccines mounting, the CDC on Tuesday tried its hand at a little damage control. Per Bloomberg: The benefits of messenger RNA Covid-19 vaccines clearly outweigh the risks despite heart complications seen in a relatively small number of mostly young men, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Roughly 1,200 cases of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart wall, were reported in people who received mRNA vaccines, the CDC said in its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report on Tuesday. But with about 296 million doses of mRNA vaccines having been administered as of June 11, the benefit is clear in all populations, including adolescents and young adults, the researchers reported. 3) And then there are those who think the vaccination program will do more harm than good, such as vaccine expert Geert Vanden Bossche who writes the following: "As of the early days of the mass vaccination campaigns, at least a few experts have been warning against the catastrophic impact such a program could have on global and individual health. Mass vaccination in the middle of a pandemic is prone to promoting selection and adaptation of immune escape variants that are featured by increasing infectiousness and resistance to spike protein (S)-directed antibodies (Abs), thereby diminishing protection in vaccinees and threatening the unvaccinated." "This already explains why the WHO’s mass vaccination program is not only unable to generate herd immunity (HI) but even leads to substantial erosion of the population’s immune protective capacity," he continues. "As the ongoing universal mass vaccination program will soon promote dominant propagation of highly infectious, neutralization escape mutants (i.e., so-called ‘S Ab-resistant variants’), naturally acquired, or vaccinal neutralizing Abs, will, indeed, no longer offer any protection to immunized individuals whereas high infectious pressure will continue to suppress the innate immune defense system of the nonvaccinated." "This is to say that every further increase in vaccine coverage rates will further contribute to forcing the virus into resistance to neutralizing, S-specific Abs. Increased viral infectivity, combined with evasion from antiviral immunity, will inevitably result in an additional toll taken on human health and human lives." www.zerohedge.com/markets/vaccine-expert-vanden-bossche-calls-immediate-halt-vaccinations-says-it-encourages-variantsI will admit the third one is a bit out there, but it might be worth listening to the 29 minute interview embedded into the link above. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 15, 2021 11:03:01 GMT -6
That is a remarkable statement. If you said it was not ONLY politics, I would agree.
But, saying not much is political?
And here's another explanation for you, halftime. A new report by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh has found that the most highly educated Americans are also the most vaccine hesitant... So not only are the most educated people most skeptical of taking the Covid vaccine, they are also the least likely the change their minds about it… See the full text of the paper here. It is a preprint, usually meaning not yet peer reviewed and accepted for publication.
Weighted data was used to evaluate change in vaccine intent and correlates of May vaccine hesitancy. So they were intending to see which groups changed their mind the most.
The figure (figure 1 in the full text) for PHD hesitancy is apparently the May data. The study indicates the PHD's changed their mind significantly less overall, but the table doesn't show the changes or reasons for changes over the time span. The authors mention the sample includes a relatively large number of those who are self identified on the Facebook questionnaire as PhD's.
I am not surprised very much with the finding.
PhD's worked in relatively safe environments during this time period, are not really trained to be decisive, and are certainly stubborn about changing their minds.
The number of PhD's in science or quantitative disciplines is a relatively small percentage of all PhDs, so maybe the result is not surprising. A PhD is very specialized education, and not a great indicator of ability to judge the medical evidence or for that matter to make good practical decisions. I'd trust the lawyers and masters students more in practical decision making...
Anyway, I'd sure like to see how many in each group are actually vaccinated, how many are in the "probably" would or would not, and "definitely" would or would not categories. (If a group was vaccinated they were listed a not hesitant. Not sure they would respond as much)
It would be cool to see all those groups reasons for saying they would not or probably would not be vaccinated if offered the vaccine the day they answered. The reason hesitant would be important to know. You can look at the questionnaire to see those reasons which are quite varied. Since 5 million total responses were received, and the numbers in May are less than 500K, I'd worry a little response reasons were different earlier in the period. I'd like to see how it changed in all groups.
The table breaking out education as a variable is a little deceptive on the impact of education since it does not show what percentage of the whole population is in each of the 5 categories, nowhere near the same numbers. The problem with hesitancy in terms of preventing vaccination is FAR greater in the much larger low education category. That's where we have to get a change to get to herd immunity.
BTW you will note that the counties where Trump had the largest margin were MORE hesitant than PhDs. Those not getting the flu vaccine and not making any effort to avoid others were TWICE as resistant as PhD's.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 15, 2021 11:26:05 GMT -6
Maybe some of those Ph.D's are concerned about the following: 1) According to Reuters, three new conditions have been reported by a small number of people after vaccination with jabs from Pfizer and Moderna. 2) The FDA now recognizes that the rare heart inflammation seen in some patients, Per Bloomberg: The benefits of messenger RNA Covid-19 vaccines clearly outweigh the risks despite heart complications seen in a relatively small number of mostly young men, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 3) And then there are those who think the vaccination program will do more harm than good, such as vaccine expert Geert Vanden Bossche who writes the following: (unsupported claims omitted) I will admit the third one is a bit out there, but it might be worth listening to the 29 minute interview embedded into the link above. If the PhD's are worried about those reasons they really are suspect in decision making if not downright stupid.
After your post with highlight content above (thank you), I don't really need to respond to point out how weak the concerns are.
Seems to boil down to rare side effects and a fringe sourced (zerohedge) anti vax "vaccine expert" with suspect credentials who you recognize as "out there.". See: his claimed debunked here. |
|
|
|
Post by halftime on Aug 15, 2021 13:10:20 GMT -6
It doesn't matter if they have a solid basis or not, the point is they aren't being influenced by politics. Just like a lot of others. If you pulled your head out of you political ass you might see the world in a more accurate light.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 15, 2021 14:37:39 GMT -6
It doesn't matter if they have a solid basis or not, the point is they aren't being influenced by politics. Just like a lot of others. If you pulled your head out of you political ass you might see the world in a more accurate light.
Wait a minute. Nobody said politics is always the influence. Some aren't influenced. I agree. Agreed with that above.
But it sure seems to be a factor in the overall equation. And nothing in this study says PhD's aren't influenced by politics. Just that they are hesitant like the rest of the population and don't change their minds as much.
YOU are the one who said above that you "doubt if much or any of that has to do with politics." Where's your support for that remarkable conclusion?
This and every other study finds a correlation with politics. I don't know how you can explain that.
Besides. Any conclusion, whichever way, about PhD's is relatively insignificant. They make up a few percent of the sample. Are of little importance in the debate.
The good news in this study is that lawyers and those holding masters degrees are like most highly educated people, thinking straight...maybe a bit odd for some to see lawyers doing that, but no surprise to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by halftime on Aug 15, 2021 15:23:44 GMT -6
It doesn't matter if they have a solid basis or not, the point is they aren't being influenced by politics. Just like a lot of others. If you pulled your head out of you political ass you might see the world in a more accurate light.
Wait a minute. Nobody said politics is always the influence. Some aren't influenced. I agree. Agreed with that above.
But it sure seems to be a factor in the overall equation. And nothing in this study says PhD's aren't influenced by politics. Just that they are hesitant like the rest of the population and don't change their minds as much.
YOU are the one who said above that you "doubt if much or any of that has to do with politics." Where's your support for that remarkable conclusion?
This and every other study finds a correlation with politics. I don't know how you can explain that.
Besides. Any conclusion, whichever way, about PhD's is relatively insignificant. They make up a few percent of the sample. Are of little importance in the debate.
The good news in this study is that lawyers and those holding masters degrees are like most highly educated people, thinking straight...maybe a bit odd for some to see lawyers doing that, but no surprise to me.
Groups with low vaccination rates are all over the political map. How dense are you ? |
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on Aug 15, 2021 18:12:22 GMT -6
I guess I've know my share of really dumb and really smart people. The one characteristic I find they seem to oftentimes share is a lack of general common sense. The stupid folks are just ... stupid. The smart folks can be brilliant in their particular field of expertise and almost clueless about other things. Of course, there are exceptions with both.
FWIW, I was discussing the relatively slow vaccination rate in my county last week with a health department nurse. She said the primary people who aren't getting vaccinated here are young adults. For some, it's the "I'm gonna live forever" "I'm invincible" "COVID only kills old people" attitude. Some have bought into the sterility conspiracy theory, she said.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 15, 2021 18:50:38 GMT -6
Wait a minute. Nobody said politics is always the influence. Some aren't influenced. I agree. Agreed with that above.
But it sure seems to be a factor in the overall equation.
YOU are the one who said above that you "doubt if much or any of that has to do with politics."
Groups with low vaccination rates are all over the political map. How dense are you ? We are talking about political influence on that rate. Surely you do not believe that the evidence in this study indicates politics isn't a pretty significant variable.
The evidence is that low vaccination numbers in red states are significantly higher. It's not the only variable I agree. How do you explain that?
|
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Aug 15, 2021 20:41:14 GMT -6
Study Finds Children Born During Lockdown Have Lost IQ Points, Impaired Cognitive FunctioningA new study has found that mean IQ scores of young children born during the pandemic have tumbled by as much as 22 points while verbal, motor and cognitive performance have all suffered as a result of lockdown.
With limited stimulation at home and less interaction with the world outside, pandemic-era children appear to have scored shockingly low on tests designed to assess cognitive development,” reports the Guardian. www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/12/children-born-during-pandemic-have-lower-iqs-us-study-findsThe study was conducted by researchers at Brown University and included 672 children born both before and after the pandemic began in March 2020. “In the decade preceding the pandemic, the mean IQ score on standardized tests for children aged between three months and three years of age hovered around 100, but for children born during the pandemic that number tumbled to 78,” the study found. Researchers concluded that the primary reason for the impairment on cognitive functioning was lack of stimulation and interaction at home. According to lead study author Sean Deoni, “The ability to course-correct becomes smaller, the older that child gets,” meaning that this inferior foundation is likely to impact the child throughout adolescence and into adulthood. As Michael Curzon notes, all of these factors were exacerbated by lockdown measures which kept babies and young children away from other children, as well as mask mandates. “Children born over the past year of lockdowns – at a time when the Government has prevented babies from seeing elderly relatives and other extended family members, from socializing at parks or with the children of their parent’s friends, and from studying the expressions on the faces behind the masks of locals in indoor public spaces – have significantly reduced verbal, motor and overall cognitive performance compared to children born before, according to a new U.S. study. Tests on early learning, verbal development and non-verbal development all produced results that were far behind those from the years preceding the lockdowns.” The study was conducted in the state of Rhode Island and included predominantly white children. The fate of poorer children from less affluent socio-economic backgrounds, most of whom will be non-white, is likely to be significantly worse. However, don’t expect many leftists, who in general have vehemently supported draconian lockdowns, to care much about that.
|
|
