I've decided for myself whether I need the booster, and the answer for me is no.Tomorrow the FDA advisory committee meets to decide if we need boosters.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I've decided for myself whether I need the booster, and the answer for me is no.Tomorrow the FDA advisory committee meets to decide if we need boosters.
does that mean if you had any version Omicron you likely have immunity to the others? I have Covid as we speak. I wonder which version. btw almost asymptomatic.The only reason tested was my wife was also positive. Nasty cough but nothing else.I think the variants of Omicron are very closely related to Omicron where the other variants had more distinct features that were different enough to call them new variants essentially. Like a tree where Alpha and Delta and Omicron are all distinct new branches from the trunk but the variants of Omicron are just new sprouts off of the Omicron branch itself.
The whole push for vaccination of kids and boosters to healthy people with a vaccine that has basically no effect against Omicron other than some very short term boost (estimated to be 4-10 weeks) is baffling to me as well. The booster shots do literally nothing that I can see for a healthy person that has already been vaccinated or has natural immunity from previous infection. Why the CDC and FDA are pushing these is beyond explanation. Even the UK and a lot of Europe are now telling people that they don't need to get boosted unless you are high risk.
that I don't think is really known right now. I think the general answer is yes, if you have Omicron original or BA2 then you generally have immunity to BA4/5 as they are close enough (for certain their are acceptations but you don't hear of much re-infection if you already had Omicron before) . If you had Alpha or Delta, then it appears that you have very minimal protection against infection and transmission although I think that most people who get re-infected have minor symptoms compared to the first time or for those that getting Omicron is the first time they are getting Covid.does that mean if you had any version Omicron you likely have immunity to the others? I have Covid as we speak. I wonder which version. btw almost asymptomatic.The only reason tested was my wife was also positive. Nasty cough but nothing else.
The headline makes no sense if I look at the chart. the red which is triple vaccinated accounts for 65% of deaths not 80%. the 84% is triple vaccinated plus double vaccinated (as close as can be read). And no idea where the 90% comes from as the graph shows like I said is about 84% (obviously the red plus orange does not go all the way down to the 10% in the chart). So I don't understand why articles try to lie about numbers as they lose all credibility when the numbers themselves are fully able to stand on their own.Not vouching for the accuracy of this but it was posted on another site.
Similar to recent data from the UK. There may be something to it but don't hold your breath on the CDC releasing any data on this and if they do, it's likely to be misrepresented.Not vouching for the accuracy of this but it was posted on another site.
Perhaps not the best headline but it still means that boosted are dying in greater numbers than their representation in the general population.The headline makes no sense if I look at the chart. the red which is triple vaccinated accounts for 65% of deaths not 80%. the 84% is triple vaccinated plus double vaccinated (as close as can be read). And no idea where the 90% comes from as the graph shows like I said is about 84% (obviously the red plus orange does not go all the way down to the 10% in the chart). So I don't understand why articles try to lie about numbers as they lose all credibility when the numbers themselves are fully able to stand on their own.
And then there is the fact that of those eligible to be vaccinated in Canada, 86.5% are fully vaccinated and about 55% are triple vaccinated. So 86.5% are vaccinated and 84% of people dying are vaccinated. So all that is saying is that the vaccine really doesn't do much anymore as the percent of vaccinated people dying versus the percent of people vaccinated are the same.
So this above graph and headline is garbage.
Not necessarily. Those that are fully vaxxed are most likely to be in bad shape in the first place, and more likely to die of any cause. I am not a vax proponent, and I think the booster shots are worthless. But I won't go so far as to say that the greater of number of deaths in the boosted population is because being boosted increases your chances of death. Correlation does not equal causation.Perhaps not the best headline but it still means that boosted are dying in greater numbers than their representation in the general population.
So the correct interpretation of that data is that vaccination does not lower deaths and boosted increases chances of death rather significantly.
It is obvious from that graph that those not fully vaxxed are best protected from hospitalizations and death.
you are partially correct. At an 86% vax rate i don't think there is any reason to think those vaxxed are the ones at the most risk. it seems the small group not getting vaxxed have strong feelings about getting vaxxed regardless of their health condition. what does seem pretty obvious is it is hard to make any case getting vaxxed and boosted helps at all.Not necessarily. Those that are fully vaxxed are most likely to be in bad shape in the first place, and more likely to die of any cause. I am not a vax proponent, and I think the booster shots are worthless. But I won't go so far as to say that the greater of number of deaths in the boosted population is because being boosted increases your chances of death. Correlation does not equal causation.
Exactly. like saying that a much higher percentage of people die that live in nursing homes than the general population therefore nursing homes kill people. nursing homes don't kill people, it is just the people that live in nursing home are very old and sick and are going to die in relatively short amount of time.Not necessarily. Those that are fully vaxxed are most likely to be in bad shape in the first place, and more likely to die of any cause. I am not a vax proponent, and I think the booster shots are worthless. But I won't go so far as to say that the greater of number of deaths in the boosted population is because being boosted increases your chances of death. Correlation does not equal causation.
I think (don't have to time to pour through it) what the data is starting to show is that a vaccine developed for the original wild strain and that worked great against Alpha and decent against Delta really does not have much effect on Omicron and certainly minimal effect on the subvariants of Omicron. Furthermore, appears to have no effect against infection and transmission from Omicron. Hence the CDC's recommendation for healthy people, especially young children to get vaccinated and/or boosted has no basis that I can see and has at this point little basis in statistical medical facts.you are partially correct. At an 86% vax rate i don't think there is any reason to think those vaxxed are the ones at the most risk. it seems the small group not getting vaxxed have strong feelings about getting vaxxed regardless of their health condition. what does seem pretty obvious is it is hard to make any case getting vaxxed and boosted helps at all.
If 86% vax rate--90% of deaths(currently reported in Canada) shouldn't be occuring! The US is no where near 86%you are partially correct. At an 86% vax rate i don't think there is any reason to think those vaxxed are the ones at the most risk. it seems the small group not getting vaxxed have strong feelings about getting vaxxed regardless of their health condition. what does seem pretty obvious is it is hard to make any case getting vaxxed and boosted helps at all.
USA is 75.3% fully vaccinated for greater than 12 years old which I think is the comparison to 86% in Canada for same group. USA has 88% with at least one dose for 12 years and older. So not like it is a huge difference. this whole USA doesn't vax is not really true and USA is not a huge amount different from most other countries at this point. And I think what we are seeing for vaccine effectiveness it that the difference between one or two or three doses is really nothing at this point. So from that standpoint the USA is basically the same vaccine status as rest of world when you look at it that one shot is not any different than multiple shots.If 86% vax rate--90% of deaths(currently reported in Canada) shouldn't be occuring! The US is no where near 86%
Some of the most vulnerable are not being vaxxed at all because the side effects could be enough to kill. My own grandmother who lives in assisted living is vaxxed but not boosted because my aunt who is her medical POA felt that it was a greater risk to be boosted than not.Exactly. like saying that a much higher percentage of people die that live in nursing homes than the general population therefore nursing homes kill people. nursing homes don't kill people, it is just the people that live in nursing home are very old and sick and are going to die in relatively short amount of time.
those triple vaccinated are by far the ultra high risk group mainly consisting of the very old. which as I will say for the ten thousandsth time, the vaccine is not Captain America super serum fountain of youth potion. if you are 84 years old and have a triple co-morbidity with a life expectancy of less than 12 months and are vaccinated and die of covid, it is not covid that is really the cause, it is the fact that you are 84 and very sick and it is your time.
the definition of vulnerable is anybody over 65 years old or obese or diabetes (obese and diabetes being the two co-morbidity that have shown to make up a very high percent of those who have died from Covid). That is not a small population subset. Data shows 81% of covid deaths are over 65 years old. 91.4% of over 65 are vaccinated, 70% of that age group is boosted which is way higher than any other group.Some of the most vulnerable are not being vaxxed at all because the side effects could be enough to kill. My own grandmother who lives in assisted living is vaxxed but not boosted because my aunt who is her medical POA felt that it was a greater risk to be boosted than not.
I posted here a couple of weeks ago that my grandmother just got over her second case of mild covid in the assisted living community. Both times was very mild for her and she is 90 years old with some dementia, blind, and with hearing loss.
I would not assume that the most vulnerable are skewed towards boosted. I don't believe that's true. My mom before she passed (cancer) wasn't either. And the most vulnerable are a small population that aren't going to significantly change the composition of the vaxxed, boosted, unvaxxed makeup.
I think we are in agreement that risk is a function of age, health, exposures, exposure dosage, exposure duration, and immune function and that vaccination is an individual decision which should be informed by that personal risk. I had been a proponent of those high risk and above 65 probably choosing to be vaccinated. I also advocated young and healthy to not be vaxxed.the definition of vulnerable is anybody over 65 years old or obese or diabetes (obese and diabetes being the two co-morbidity that have shown to make up a very high percent of those who have died from Covid). That is not a small population subset. Data shows 81% of covid deaths are over 65 years old. 91.4% of over 65 are vaccinated, 70% of that age group is boosted which is way higher than any other group.
Point it, vaccination does not appear in any data subset to be 'causing 'deaths like some people are trying to push. that is no different type of propaganda than the CDC saying to vaccinate and boost everybody regardless of health status or previous infection.
Good to hear from you. You had previously shared your double lung transplant history and was worried about you.I don’t know if my personal experience is of any interest in this thread, but I will offer for this who may be interested.
Background
I am a double lung transplant recipient (nearly 8 years now) that was necessary due to being a Cystic Fibrosis patient. I became steroid and other required drugs diabetic post transplant as well as kidney deficient all placing me high on the chart of risk factors for severe COVID should I become infected.
Vaccine Results
I am enrolled in a study out of Johns Hopkins in which I draw a blood sample on a prescribed schedule 1-month, 3-months, 6-months post each “shot” with the schedule restarting after each shot.
The first and third months after my first set of two shots yielded negative for COVID antibodies. The first mafter my third shot, I was minimally positive and that number declined by about 30% at the third month. I received the fourth shot the first day that the fourth was made available for highly immunocompromised individuals. Both my first month and third mont post the fourth shot were barely positive and significantly less so than the third shot results.
Monoclonal Antibodies
Shortly after (within days) of my third month post the fourth shot blood draw, my number was called to receive a prophylactic dose of monoclonal antibodies. The first month after receiving this treatment, I “developed” antibody levels that were nearly the equal of the low end of what a non-immunocompromised individual would see from the vaccines themselves. I’m hopeful that my third month blood draw in about 3 weeks will yield similar results. In any event, I expect that I will be receiving this treatment every six months for the foreseeable future.
I’ve been advised to hold off on the fifth shot that I have been eligible to get for several weeks,
I hope this was interesting and not too boring for this group.
This one is very interesting. I hope it's accurate.I know many here will dismiss this, but FWIW, here is some reasonably current vaccine effectiveness data
Interesting TWIST on reporting the data:This one is very interesting. I hope it's accurate.
COVID-19 Breakthrough Data
Cases and hospitalizations by vaccination statuscoronavirus.health.ny.gov
I believe we are now battling what is the normal flu. I don't think the latest strains of COVID are any worse than historical flus.This one is very interesting. I hope it's accurate.
COVID-19 Breakthrough Data
Cases and hospitalizations by vaccination statuscoronavirus.health.ny.gov
Girl you know its true!I believe we are now battling what is the normal flu. I don't think the latest strains of COVID are any worse than historical flus.
What does the future hold? Nobody knows. But what is scary is that the govts, media and medical industry have as little credibility as Milli Vanilli.
fun fact, the first concert that I ever went to was Young MC and Milli Vanilli in Allentown/Lehigh area. It was about 6 months before the scandal broke.I believe we are now battling what is the normal flu. I don't think the latest strains of COVID are any worse than historical flus.
What does the future hold? Nobody knows. But what is scary is that the govts, media and medical industry have as little credibility as Milli Vanilli.
I had it three weeks ago. Vaxxed (not boostered). Mine was a step below the flu. The flu usually kicks my a** due to the fever. I don't do well battling a fever. Thank God I only head slight chills, body aches and a headache. The headache was the worst part for me. It took me a solid 10 days to get my energy back. Not sure if it was Covid related or if I got used to being lazy. We are also wearing masks at the office again here in San Francisco due to our safety director panicking over a small outbreak in our office. We all made it back unharmed, but alas we are wearing masks again.I believe we are now battling what is the normal flu. I don't think the latest strains of COVID are any worse than historical flus.
What does the future hold? Nobody knows. But what is scary is that the govts, media and medical industry have as little credibility as Milli Vanilli.
I believe we are now battling what is the normal flu. I don't think the latest strains of COVID are any worse than historical flus.
What does the future hold? Nobody knows. But what is scary is that the govts, media and medical industry have as little credibility as Milli Vanilli.
I am not sure. are you talking "with" or "of". I think the stats you are looking at are "with". This is something we didn't really test for prior to COVID. in many cases, especially the elderly, if someone died of the flu it was called pneumonia or congestive issues. We aren't comparing apples to apples...and yet there are still ~120k dying per year due to covid based on current lower numbers projected into the future, a lot more than a typical flu year during which ~35k die.
Young MC---one of my favorite!fun fact, the first concert that I ever went to was Young MC and Milli Vanilli in Allentown/Lehigh area. It was about 6 months before the scandal broke.
When you take away "with" covid then the numbers make covid look like the flu. Of course if you add "with" the flu then the Flu looks like covid!I am not sure. are you talking "with" or "of". I think the stats you are looking at are "with". This is something we didn't really test for prior to COVID. in many cases, especially the elderly, if someone died of the flu it was called pneumonia or congestive issues. We aren't comparing apples to apples.
Agreed...but we never tracked the flu with this level of scrutiny before. I've known people who died of "natural causes". they had COPD and caught a cold. Was it the COPD or was it the cold? Fact is, the body couldn't process the excess body fluids. today, if someone with COPD dies and happens to test positive for COVID, it is considered a "by COVID" death.When you take away "with" covid then the numbers make covid look like the flu. Of course if you add "with" the flu then the Flu looks like covid!
I am not sure. are you talking "with" or "of". I think the stats you are looking at are "with". This is something we didn't really test for prior to COVID. in many cases, especially the elderly, if someone died of the flu it was called pneumonia or congestive issues. We aren't comparing apples to apples.
OK, whatever.lol... you guys are so predictable. I'd love to see some of your facts/evidence that support the "with" and "of" talking point on which you base your opinion, @PSUEngineer89 and I have agreed that the excess death numbers shoot that talking point out of the water.
Last year, Alameda County in California admitted that their numbers were inflated, and that's just one example.OK, whatever.
June 1 2022
COVID death tolls: scientists acknowledge errors in WHO estimates
Researchers with the World Health Organization explain mistakes in high-profile mortality estimates for Germany and Sweden.www.nature.com
That was my point as well, if we tracked the flu like covid no one would leave their house. Up until two years ago I never heard of a flu test. I'm sure they were always there. But if I started throwing up I knew I had the flu. And for most people covid wasnt as bad as the flu---even when not vaxxed!Agreed...but we never tracked the flu with this level of scrutiny before. I've known people who died of "natural causes". they had COPD and caught a cold. Was it the COPD or was it the cold? Fact is, the body couldn't process the excess body fluids. today, if someone with COPD dies and happens to test positive for COVID, it is considered a "by COVID" death.
Massachussets also revised some of their fatality data as they were counting people that had Covid weeks and months before dying as Covid deaths.Last year, Alameda County in California admitted that their numbers were inflated, and that's just one example.
Also, you're right about how the flu, which just is another corona virus, never has been treated with the level of scrutiny with which this virus, which now is going on three years old, has been treated. I'm still amazed that teams are still under protocols for this.
that's right...it was the "with" and "from" argument. people that died in a motorcycle accident got counted as a COVID death. That case got people to start looking closer and realized anyone who tested positive was counted as a COVID death. And we know how those tests, at least early on, were very unreliable. Even coach CJF lamented on how many players were testing positive. They ended up adopting a policy to test once, if positive, test again. If conflicting, one + and one -, to test a third time. But the average + test was not retested for normal people.Massachussets also revised some of their fatality data as they were counting people that had Covid weeks and months before dying as Covid deaths.
I don't think anybody is saying that Covid has not caused any excess deaths, the question is how many. My guesstimate based on the information from other countries that track 'with' and 'from' better, Alameda county review, Massachusetts, article, and some random other tidbits of information that I read over the past 18+ months is that probably Covid deaths are between 20-35% over accounted for being 'With' instead 'Of' covid. I would go further to say that another 10-15% of Covid deaths were really people essentially on their death bed and that they might have died of Covid but if they did not die of Covid, would have died of their age/co-morbidity within a few months.lol... you guys are so predictable. I'd love to see some of your facts/evidence that support the "with" and "of" talking point on which you base your opinion, @PSUEngineer89 and I have agreed that the excess death numbers shoot that talking point out of the water.
to this day, the average age of a person who died of COVID is over the life expectancy age in the state of Ohio.I don't think anybody is saying that Covid has not caused any excess deaths, the question is how many. My guesstimate based on the information from other countries that track 'with' and 'from' better, Alameda county review, Massachusetts, article, and some random other tidbits of information that I read over the past 18+ months is that probably Covid deaths are between 20-35% over accounted for being 'With' instead 'Of' covid. I would go further to say that another 10-15% of Covid deaths were really people essentially on their death bed and that they might have died of Covid but if they did not die of Covid, would have died of their age/co-morbidity within a few months.
be quiet, that is the secret the CDC and government doesn't want you to know.to this day, the average age of a person who died of COVID is over the life expectancy age in the state of Ohio.
Your 10-15% "guess" is not unreasonable but I think your 20-35% guess is. You have to have something more/better than random tidbits. You'd think, considering the massive cottage industry of data-twisting studies available these days, would have come with SOMETHING by now that supports the "with" and "from" argument. I'm not arguing that this argument is totally wrong or nonexistent, I just believe that the excess death numbers show/prove that it's insignificant.I don't think anybody is saying that Covid has not caused any excess deaths, the question is how many. My guesstimate based on the information from other countries that track 'with' and 'from' better, Alameda county review, Massachusetts, article, and some random other tidbits of information that I read over the past 18+ months is that probably Covid deaths are between 20-35% over accounted for being 'With' instead 'Of' covid. I would go further to say that another 10-15% of Covid deaths were really people essentially on their death bed and that they might have died of Covid but if they did not die of Covid, would have died of their age/co-morbidity within a few months.