Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bill Meeks]

Interesting, thanks.  Aside from a similar-looking name, it's not the same thing as "Pneumonia" other than it could also produce those symptoms.

Yes, lowercase "pneumonia" describes a condition more so than a specific disease. Uppercase "Pneumonia" apparently can describe specific types of the general condition based on cause. Some are caused by bacteria, and some are caused by a virus. I believe it is the viral types where some vaccines exist.

I've heard doctors speak of a "COVID-induced" pneumonia, too. Again I think in that context "pneumonia" is more used to describe a condition of the lungs.

Let's not to get too far off into the weeds over the definition of pneumonia. However, it does bring up what I think is a salient point. COVID is just one variation from the universe of corona viruses. COVID is a type of flu. And we have never been able to develop a truly effective vaccine against "the flu". It looks like that record is continuing when it comes to COVID (at this point in time, at least). Our vaccines are losing their effectiveness rather quickly. And compared to the long-term effectiveness of vaccines such as Shingles, Hepatitis, Polio and others -- the COVID vaccines are losing their effectiveness at warp speed.

So returning the circle to our mandates discussion -- should we not mandate boosters as well? After all, the person who gets vaccinated today likely has greatly diminished protection this time next year. And the COVID virus, like other flu viruses is going to continue to mutate. So does that mean we need to mandate whatever next year's COVID vaccine variant looks like? The big difference to me with those vaccinations that are required for some things (entering public schools being the most visible), is that they are proven to give essentially lifetime (or near lifetime) immunity. And they have been in use for decades in many cases, thus there is a lot of confidence in their safety. Neither of those is true for flu shots nor for the current COVID vaccines.

And let's introduce one more point about those "mandatory" vaccination requirements. They do not apply to home-schooled kids, and possibly in some states, don't apply to private schools either. So there are alternative schooling avenues for vaccine objectors in those places. And from news stories in the past about the measles vaccine, some mothers take the home-school option to avoid vaccinating their kids.

But essentially saying you can't work anywhere without a vaccine, and thus in effect, can't support yourself and family is a whole different level of government overreach in my opinion. We have just never done that in the past, and if we are about to start, I think it should be done through the full legislative process. That means introduce, debate, and vote on a bill in the House. Then send the bill over to the Senate for debate and approval there. Finally, the approved bill goes to the President for signature. Now it is a bona-fide law. And the people had their chance to lobby their representatives and influence the vote along the way. That's the way forward to me. Just having a single person such as a non-elected agency head issue an edict is a recipe for contention. And contention is what we have.

Other things in my state that are "mandatory" like wearing seat belts and carrying no-fault liability insurance coverage for automobiles were all voted on and passed by the Georgia House and Senate, then signed by the Governor at the time. They became actual laws. They were not put in place by the head of DMV (or even the Governor) just issuing a mandate. Yeah, some folks still grumble about the seat belts, but they accept it because it went through the process, was voted "yes" by the majority of their elected representatives, and everyone had their chance to fairly lobby their case. If COVID is truly an existential threat like some seem to believe, shouldn't it garner the full attention of our elected representatives who then act together to craft a new law? If they can pass stimulus checks in a few days, then surely something as big as nationwide COVID vaccine mandates could get debate and a vote in a few days as well. Perhaps one reason that has not happened yet is that those pushing for the mandate fear it may prove too unpopular to get passed. If that is true, then what game are we really playing here?

[Bill Hornibrook]

First off, if vaccination helped reduce the spread, there should have been some sort of correlation with increased vaccination rates and reduction in cases. The opposite seems to be true. 

That's because Delta is much more contagious than the original bug. We had no cases of Covid previously, but when Delta hit our area, in just a matter of weeks it took out every single unvaccinated employee of our club. I've seen waves of flu, colds, stomach bugs... I've never seen anything do this before.

Make no mistake: Delta is hella contagious! Old Covid rules (6 feet of social distancing, 15 minutes in the same room) simply don't apply - or didn't with us anyway.

That said, we're done! Every employee is either vaccinated or has had the disease. And I think that's true for our county, where the numbers have been falling steadily over the last few weeks. Hopefully we're over the hump.

[Stephen Swaffer]

This article is a peer reviewed article published in a mainstream scientific journal that uses a very large data sample:

http://europepmc.org/article/MED/34591202

If this article is correct, and there is no correlation between rate of vaccination and rate of infections, then, IMO, there is very little argument for vaccination status to be a public health concern-or a matter that anyone else really needs to know about me.  And there should be very little concern on my part whether or not those around me are vaccinated.

You could argue that the data is skewed-and in some places it may be-but from what I read on here testing practices and reporting vary widely from place to place, yet this attempt at a scientific study shows consistent results across the board.  Do we consider science and stats, or just our feelings?

Someone compared the vaccine to fall protection.  Years ago, I worked where we had a task that had us 5 feet off the floor-requiring fall protection in a manufacturing facility.  I was told to use a harness and to anchor to a certain point.  By my math, using that anchor point would have put my feet around 6 feet below the concrete floor before my harness arrested my fall. I told my boss I would not wear the harness and increase my chances of tripping and falling until he provided an anchor point that would actually protect me.  He never reprimanded me for not wearing a harness.  The argument exists that the vaccine could protect me from a serious disease at some level of risk.  If the above linked study is true, then the argument does not exist that vaccination provides any protection for those around me-so insisting that others get vaccinated to protect you makes little sense.

[Chris Hindle]

Here it is (from the CDC):  https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/pneumo/public/index.html. I didn't know it existed either until I stumbled upon it searching for adult vaccines. It is for a specific type of pneumonia, but there is a vaccine for it nonetheless.

That was on the list of "things" I had to get done before my Kidney Transplant.
The version up here is called "Prevnar 13", and straight pneumonia is just one of the things it protects you from.
It is recommended for those over 50.
Chris.

[Bill Hornibrook]

Do we consider science and stats, or just our feelings?

In my case I'm considering neither. I'm just reporting on how we're dealing with Covid as a business - the topic of this thread. I'll leave the conversations on statistics, ethics, etc. to others.

[Scott Helmke]

The problem with that concept is the way the testing numbers are being generated certainly makes it LOOK like being vaccinated reduces risk of getting the virus.  But, there's a huge problem with how those numbers are calculated. First off, if vaccination helped reduce the spread, there should have been some sort of correlation with increased vaccination rates and reduction in cases. The opposite seems to be true.

Brian,

Could you share your sources for the assertion made above?  That seems like rather a bold claim to make.

[Tim McCulloch]

The vaccines will provide protection for 90%+ of the population from getting sick enough to require hospitalization, and they *do* reduce the incidence of infections but not by the same percentage.  Folks like Gen Powell, being 84 with multiple, serious co-morbidity illnesses, are part the at 10% who will not do as well as younger vaccine recipients and those with fewer or less serious co-morbidities.  Vaccination reduces the amount of time an infected, asymptomatic person sheds virus, on the order of nearly 1/3 (~3 days instead of 8-9 days) and that reduces exposure to others.

So since this is about business... here's what comes down from our shop:  if you're not vaccinated you will not be dispatched for work and you can't work indoors in our office, shop or in client premises.  We require our employees to comply with company policy, state or county health orders, or venue/client requirements, whichever are more stringent, any time a worker is on the clock or otherwise represents the company.  Workers who lie about their status, or falsify vaccination documents will be terminated.

We can't stay in business without healthy workers and it's a requirement of OSHA that we promote and provide a safe and healthy workplace.  I'm not sure what folks don't understand about this.

Finally, the comment about a fall arrest harness not being an 'internal' thing... true, but failing to use one when working at height shows several things:  first, a disregard for personal safety; next, a disregard for the safety of others in that falling humans can land on other humans; and a creation of a false equivalency.  If choices you make for yourself effect only and exclusively oneself, great, but in *public* health, it's not just about the individual, it's about the common health and welfare.  And again, if you don't give a rats ass about yourself, get your shot because there are millions of folks who CANNOT TAKE IT no matter how much they might want it.  Reduce your likelihood of being "Typhoid Larry" or "Corona Connie".

[Russell Ault]

This article is a peer reviewed article published in a mainstream scientific journal that uses a very large data sample:

http://europepmc.org/article/MED/34591202
{...}

Two important things to note:

• While the European Journal of Epidemiology is certainly well-respected and peer-reviewed, this "article" was published in the journal's "correspondence" section, which is not peer reviewed. Another indication that this wasn't peer-reviewed is that it was "Received 2021 Aug 17; Accepted 2021 Sep 9" (peer review typically takes one or more months).
• I'm pretty sure that if this were submitted as a Stats 101 assignment it would get a failing grade. The data in Fig. 1 appears to be somewhat hand-picked (e.g. the inclusion criteria was set up in such a way that a significant number of EU countries, including nearly half of the G7, are absent from the dataset), and the spattery-looking graph that results seems intended to confuse (particularly the decision to include a regression line which, while likely mathematically correct, is clearly some kind of sick joke). Moreover, despite what appears to be an attempt at obfuscation (using the phrase "largely similar" in a statistical analysis is so weaselly I'm surprised anyone would print it), the data displayed in Fig. 2 appears to directly contradict the assertions being made: both the median and upper quartile per capita cases are clearly trending lower as as vaccination rates trend higher.

(Why am I reminded of a Mark Twain quote?)

-Russ

[Bill Meeks]

Just found this interesting article about the OSHA Vaccine Mandate Rule:  https://www.lawfareblog.com/whats-status-biden-administrations-workplace-vaccine-mandate. It goes over the current status and some of the history behind the rule's idea. It also explains some of the potential rough patches that exist for actually implementing the rule.

I also believe that if the rule is actually implemented and enforced in the next 6 months or so, it does not survive the next national election in the U.S. Most certainly the folks adversely impacted by it are not going to be happy, and even some vaccinated folks, who are nonetheless against such mandates will also not be pleased. 2022 could be an interesting year.

[Luke Geis]

Wow, you guys have been busy on this subject. I was waiting for others to chime in before I brought my newest data to the party.

Story Time!!!

Guess who finally got sick after two years of being disease/virus-free? This guy !!!!! And guess what it was? Covid!!!!! And guess how I got it??? Well, your guess is as good as mine... I have been following the same routine for two years now. I observe the rules and mandates ( sans getting jabbed ) and never got sick. I and my wife went to Ross, which was perhaps the first time in a very long time that the two of us went anywhere together, we both got covid about a week later. We both wore masks, I was a good boy yadda, yadda. That is the only guess I can think of?

How was it? Let's put it this way, I have had colds worse than this. I have had flu's that make covid seem like a bug bite where flu's would be compared as a rattlesnake bite. For me, covid was weak sauce and I AM SO GLAD I DIDN"T GET THE VACCINE!!!! I still can't smell 100%, but other than a headache for a few days, a very small fever on the first noted night, and loss of smell, it was not much more than a very weak cold. I never had to take decongestants, I didn't need Nyquil, all I needed was Asprin. The one thing I can say is a downer is the persistence of it. I am now 3 weeks post positive test, and I still have diminished sense of smell, a very slight cough, and minor sniffles ( when I say slight and minor, I mean almost so innocuous that others would be hard-pressed to know I was sick at all ).

So I am back at work and I am not EVER going to Vaccinate for ANY mandate. If it comes at me like that, I am out.

Some things I learned while I was taking a short required vaccation:

1. There is a possibility that deaths are not related to covid at all, but due to the treatment methods used in hospitals. The drug Remdesivir is one of a couple of drugs that are being used to treat severe condition covid patients in the hospital. Remdsivere is a drug that has a very sordid history. In one trial 53% of patients died from its use. It was initially used to treat Ebola but was since dropped as it had a mortality rate that exceeded the placebo mortality rate of Ebola patients. Read up on Remdisevere. It appears to be one of only two drugs used for the treatment of covid patients who are admitted into the hospital.

2. No one knows crap and they don't tell you anything useful. Upon initial results, I received a call from the county health board. More or less, it was quarantine, how do you feel and get a negative test before you re-integrate..... I go 10 days after my first result to get a go back to work clearance, Keep in mind I have little or no symptoms, I tell them I am just looking for a follow-up test. They test me and it comes back negative a couple of days later. I am getting antsy to go back to work and it is now 14 days post initial result, and I go to take another test and tell them the same thing, I just need to go back to work... Not a word... Not a single health official, nurse, test administrator, no one, told me that if I was good after 10 days and I still test positive, that I can return to work. My boss calls me on what would have been my 14th day and says he found out via a UCSB employee that they go by the CDC rules of ten days and no need for medication. Look into that and see if I apply and I can come back to work if I do. I find it buried deep in menus on the CDC page. The synopsis is that if you have been quarantined for 10 days, have no symptoms that require medication for two days, and are showing signs of obvious health improvement, you can return to work.

3. The covid test can pop positive for as long as three months after your initial contraction! This does not mean you are contagious, only that you still have viral media in your system. The CDC says that after 10 days of sickness, your covid proteins are likely to not have any virility and likely are not infectious.  I.E. after 10 days, you are no longer infectious and if your symptoms are reducing, you should be good to go about your day.

No one at my work has become infected. I work with these people every day, so perhaps I dodged a bullet? I was sick before I went to get a test. I went to work Tuesday and noticed a slight sniffle and weak cough ( very mild cold symptoms ), went to work Wednesday and had a fever late that night, went the next morning to get a test since it was my day off, went to work Friday since nothing had gotten any worse and no fever. Got my test result Friday evening and told the boss the bad news the next morning. So for 3 days, I was around my co-workers and was sick. So that tells you how well I follow the rules. I went back to work last Thursday the 14th. Which would have been exactly two weeks after I went in to test. No one else has come up positive for covid that I know who has been in my circle of life.

They cannot mandate this vaccine. So many people will walkout, the economy will die. The legal fallout will simply consume the system. It will cause an unfathomable fallout that will absolutely create hell for us all. Until we can get a straight answer from anyone of credible status until they find out the reason only people in hospitals die from covid ( that was partly tongue in cheek ), we are being human pin bags. When they have a true working vaccine, we find out that Remdisivere is not what is ACTUALLY killing people in hospitals, and a clear objective path to the end game, there will be resistance from people. Some will roll over, some will be gung-ho, but there will be just as many that say hell no.

Just follow the rules and my suggestion is to wait on mandating 100% vaccination in your business until you have legal recourse. Mandating and giving your staff ultimatums is a quick way to find the ugly way around the legal system. Chicago PD, Southwest and a few others are an example. It is not going well. It won't go well

[ProSoundWeb Community]