In the continued fall out from the Hand Maiden judge, people are sick at the school she sends her kids to, the same kids she had at the white house without masks.
She says she had it in the summer, right? Did her kids not get it too? I guess everyone manages their families in different ways, but I can't imagine someone getting it in our house (or, for that matter, most people I know), without everyone else getting it.
I honestly haven't been following developments in understanding of transmission, for some time, but can someone who's had it still be a spreader again; particularly so soon?
I'm not trying to imply that it might not be a big deal, because it is a big deal, whether or not they've had it, even if it's purely a matter of example and modeling good behavior. I'm just genuinely curious about if we know to any degree, if the kids are probably not at risk for spreading it, or even catching it again, or whether or not it's just stupidity all around, everywhere, by everyone.
In the continued fall out from the Hand Maiden judge, people are sick at the school she sends her kids to, the same kids she had at the white house without masks.
She says she had it in the summer, right? Did her kids not get it too? I guess everyone manages their families in different ways, but I can't imagine someone getting it in our house (or, for that matter, most people I know), without everyone else getting it.
I honestly haven't been following developments in understanding of transmission, for some time, but can someone who's had it still be a spreader again; particularly so soon?
I'm not trying to imply that it might not be a big deal, because it is a big deal, whether or not they've had it, even if it's purely a matter of example and modeling good behavior. I'm just genuinely curious about if we know to any degree, if the kids are probably not at risk for spreading it, or even catching it again, or whether or not it's just stupidity all around, everywhere, by everyone.
She believes a party that believes it doesn't infect the young. I mean hell Katie Miller got covid back in the spring and her husband just caught it recently.
Basically she's got shit judgement and possibly infected her own kids for a chance to rip healthcare and abortions from people.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
In the continued fall out from the Hand Maiden judge, people are sick at the school she sends her kids to, the same kids she had at the white house without masks.
In the continued fall out from the Hand Maiden judge, people are sick at the school she sends her kids to, the same kids she had at the white house without masks.
She says she had it in the summer, right? Did her kids not get it too? I guess everyone manages their families in different ways, but I can't imagine someone getting it in our house (or, for that matter, most people I know), without everyone else getting it.
I honestly haven't been following developments in understanding of transmission, for some time, but can someone who's had it still be a spreader again; particularly so soon?
I'm not trying to imply that it might not be a big deal, because it is a big deal, whether or not they've had it, even if it's purely a matter of example and modeling good behavior. I'm just genuinely curious about if we know to any degree, if the kids are probably not at risk for spreading it, or even catching it again, or whether or not it's just stupidity all around, everywhere, by everyone.
She believes a party that believes it doesn't infect the young. I mean hell Katie Miller got covid back in the spring and her husband just caught it recently.
Basically she's got shit judgement and possibly infected her own kids for a chance to rip healthcare and abortions from people.
I know she has stupid beliefs. I'm just asking if the medical and scientific understanding of how the virus is transmitted, particularly by people who have already been infected, indicates that this specific issue indicates irresponsibility because they could potentially still transmit, or irresponsibility simply because they're setting a stupid shitty example (or both!).
I mean, we know she had it; or at least we know she claims to have. But do we know if her kids/husband did, also?
In the continued fall out from the Hand Maiden judge, people are sick at the school she sends her kids to, the same kids she had at the white house without masks.
She says she had it in the summer, right? Did her kids not get it too? I guess everyone manages their families in different ways, but I can't imagine someone getting it in our house (or, for that matter, most people I know), without everyone else getting it.
I honestly haven't been following developments in understanding of transmission, for some time, but can someone who's had it still be a spreader again; particularly so soon?
I'm not trying to imply that it might not be a big deal, because it is a big deal, whether or not they've had it, even if it's purely a matter of example and modeling good behavior. I'm just genuinely curious about if we know to any degree, if the kids are probably not at risk for spreading it, or even catching it again, or whether or not it's just stupidity all around, everywhere, by everyone.
She believes a party that believes it doesn't infect the young. I mean hell Katie Miller got covid back in the spring and her husband just caught it recently.
Basically she's got shit judgement and possibly infected her own kids for a chance to rip healthcare and abortions from people.
I dunno about the rest of you, but that's a trait I want on a lifetime judicial appointment.
In the continued fall out from the Hand Maiden judge, people are sick at the school she sends her kids to, the same kids she had at the white house without masks.
She says she had it in the summer, right? Did her kids not get it too? I guess everyone manages their families in different ways, but I can't imagine someone getting it in our house (or, for that matter, most people I know), without everyone else getting it.
I honestly haven't been following developments in understanding of transmission, for some time, but can someone who's had it still be a spreader again; particularly so soon?
I'm not trying to imply that it might not be a big deal, because it is a big deal, whether or not they've had it, even if it's purely a matter of example and modeling good behavior. I'm just genuinely curious about if we know to any degree, if the kids are probably not at risk for spreading it, or even catching it again, or whether or not it's just stupidity all around, everywhere, by everyone.
She believes a party that believes it doesn't infect the young. I mean hell Katie Miller got covid back in the spring and her husband just caught it recently.
Basically she's got shit judgement and possibly infected her own kids for a chance to rip healthcare and abortions from people.
I know she has stupid beliefs. I'm just asking if the medical and scientific understanding of how the virus is transmitted, particularly by people who have already been infected, indicates that this specific issue indicates irresponsibility because they could potentially still transmit, or irresponsibility simply because they're setting a stupid shitty example (or both!).
I mean, we know she had it; or at least we know she claims to have. But do we know if her kids/husband did, also?
She probably lives in a house where it would be possible to self isolate (spare bedroom with a bathroom).
Trump is on Rush Limbaugh's radio show this morning and just claimed "regeneron," the science fiction bad-guy plot device sounding thing, is a "cure" for COVID-19. Reminder that Trump has money going between him and the company making the shit so of course this is all horse shit.
This is explicitly incorrect. Regeneron is a company making a highly viable, potentially very effective treatment for COVID-19 which does have the potential to be effective enough to be considered 'a cure'.
Monoclonal (and polyclonal) antibodies are being dilligently evaluated in well run clinical trials and are showing promising results, but the trials aren't done yet.
If we are VERY lucky, then maybe this could be a cure. We just don't know yet. Regeneron might 'know', but they don't know to a good standard of statistical dilligence.
I dunno, I would consider America lucky if it didn't work to be honest.
If antibody based therapy doesn't work, then a vaccine won't work, and our only hope for resolution will probably be something like the Andromeda Strain where the virus gets bored of picking on such an easy target and moves on
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
Monkey Ball WarriorA collection of mediocre hatsSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
Eh, antibody treatments don't have a great track record, whereas vaccines... well, nobody has Polio anymore.
"I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
If antibody based therapy doesn't work, then a vaccine won't work, and our only hope for resolution will probably be something like the Andromeda Strain where the virus gets bored of picking on such an easy target and moves on
If an antibody based therapy works, then a vaccine definitely will work, the inverse isn't necessarily true. The antibodies have to get to the right place in the right concentrations to be effective.
Edit - and clearly, if one doesn't work it doesn't mean nothing can work (antibody based treatments) but, the quicker we see a success the more confidence we can take that this virus doesn't have too many clever tricks up its sleeves.
If antibody based therapy doesn't work, then a vaccine won't work, and our only hope for resolution will probably be something like the Andromeda Strain where the virus gets bored of picking on such an easy target and moves on
Spoilers
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
+1
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Great, this fucking virus might not just cause strokes and make people stupider but also give people diabetes. Not just diabetes but weird hybrid type 1 and 2 diabetes, or 1 turning into 2 or some other weird shit that makes no sense just like this coronavirus.
Just the kind of thing to make me paranoid. "Oh no I've been having frequent urination what if it's happened to me." "No you fool you pee a lot because you drink a lot of water because you were already paranoid about getting the family kidney stones to the point that you turned 'Hydration is Important' into one of your personal mantras."
On the other hand, Type II diabetic survivors of severe COVID-19 infections lose so much of their body weight that they might come off insulin altogether
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
On the other hand, Type II diabetic survivors of severe COVID-19 infections lose so much of their body weight that they might come off insulin altogether
So it just seems to damage random parts of the body depending on the person? The side effects seem to be scattered all over the place.
On a positive note my retail work place has hit month 3 of operation with no infections so distancing and masks are helping I guess? Also a no fault stay home and get tested and you get 2 weeks pay policy we are actually following. A few employees got exposed outside work and fortunately never had it but at least they were out with pay.
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
So it just seems to damage random parts of the body depending on the person? The side effects seem to be scattered all over the place.
On a positive note my retail work place has hit month 3 of operation with no infections so distancing and masks are helping I guess? Also a no fault stay home and get tested and you get 2 weeks pay policy we are actually following. A few employees got exposed outside work and fortunately never had it but at least they were out with pay.
The current theory is vascular accident from a residual hypercoagulable state vs direct damage to end organs where the virus can infect, so heart attack and stroke vs cardiomyopathy and GI dysfunction. Also, there are a lot of secondary side effects to requiring intubation and fighting off a nasty infection, like weight loss, myopathy, encephalopathy, and secondary bacterial pulmonary infection.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Great, this fucking virus might not just cause strokes and make people stupider but also give people diabetes. Not just diabetes but weird hybrid type 1 and 2 diabetes, or 1 turning into 2 or some other weird shit that makes no sense just like this coronavirus.
Just the kind of thing to make me paranoid. "Oh no I've been having frequent urination what if it's happened to me." "No you fool you pee a lot because you drink a lot of water because you were already paranoid about getting the family kidney stones to the point that you turned 'Hydration is Important' into one of your personal mantras."
Type 1 has a short "honeymoon" period where sometimes all of a sudden your pancreas starts functioning a little bit again(or fully) for a few days/a week or two. It's the last breaths and completely stops after this period. Doctors tell people who contract T1 to not get their hopes up.
There's a lot of other factors with t1 diabeties that are giant red flags, Generally you are frequently drinking because you have a unquenching thirst, and the frequent urination includes peeing in your sleep because your body is just trying to shed protiens/excess sugar, everything it can to regulate. When I was a kid I couldn't quench my thirst, but my mom caught on when I peed my bed two nights in a row and I was a young teenager. If it's t1 and took any loner I would have gotten severely ill. I'm lucky she knew the warning signs and took me to a doctor the second day and we caught it probably pretty early.
Great, this fucking virus might not just cause strokes and make people stupider but also give people diabetes. Not just diabetes but weird hybrid type 1 and 2 diabetes, or 1 turning into 2 or some other weird shit that makes no sense just like this coronavirus.
Just the kind of thing to make me paranoid. "Oh no I've been having frequent urination what if it's happened to me." "No you fool you pee a lot because you drink a lot of water because you were already paranoid about getting the family kidney stones to the point that you turned 'Hydration is Important' into one of your personal mantras."
Type 1 has a short "honeymoon" period where sometimes all of a sudden your pancreas starts functioning a little bit again(or fully) for a few days/a week or two. It's the last breaths and completely stops after this period. Doctors tell people who contract T1 to not get their hopes up.
There's a lot of other factors with t1 diabeties that are giant red flags, Generally you are frequently drinking because you have a unquenching thirst, and the frequent urination includes peeing in your sleep because your body is just trying to shed protiens/excess sugar, everything it can to regulate.
Plus you get tired super easy. In the period where I manifested symptoms but before I was diagnosed I got home from work around five, fell straight into bed and didn't wake up until five the next morning.
I went for my weekly check of the john hopkin's coronavirus map and noticed shit is going extremely poorly in Russia very suddenly:
+1
Options
David_TA fashion yes-man is no good to me.Copenhagen, DenmarkRegistered Userregular
I think a lot of Republicans are of the mindset that a vaccine is great, all the libs can take it and then everything can be opened up again because everyone else knows it's either a scam, a hoax or just the flu.
+15
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
Like a lot of the democrat logic is “I don’t want to take this because coronavirus is only 6 months old and that just isn’t enough time to make a safe vaccine.” Whereas for republicans and independents, some of the resistance is that, but you also get the “I don’t want to take any vaccines because that’s how the satan worshippers in the government give you autism” people mixed in as well.
Jealous Deva on
+4
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
Like a lot of the democrat logic is “I don’t want to take this because coronavirus is only 6 months old and that just isn’t enough time to make a safe vaccine.” Whereas for republicans and independents, some of the resistance is that, but you also get the “I don’t want to take any vaccines because that’s how the satan worshippers in the government give you autism” people mixed in as well.
I think this is it right here. I think a large chunk of democrats aren't necessarily anti-vax/anti-science, it's just that we've been aware of the CDC becoming completely co-opted and politicized and we're also more acutely aware that a vaccine simply can't be reliably developed in just 6-9 months that we'd be comfortable taking.
Would I take a vaccine that has been properly tested and vetted by scientific experts? Yes.
Would I take a vaccine that Trump forced out in a rush to beat an election? Only with an actual gun to my head.
Once I sign that sweet supplemental disability insurance plan
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I'll take any of the well documented vaccines immediately one becomes available, because the greatest risk of a 'rushed' one at this point is a lack of efficacy, and considering my plan would be to get myself and my family vaccinated and then continue to behave exactly as I am now for 6-12 months while slowly everyone else does its a null risk.
The part of vaccine development which is long and complex is...
1) Showing that it works
2) Showing that it doesn't have some incredibly rare 1/100,000 side effect
Showing that it doesn't kill you or make you frequently horribly ill in the first 2 months isn't hard once you have the volunteers and the trial doses, which all the big name vaccines do. And to me, the latter two are risks worth taking considering Coronavirus exists and I could be infected at any time. Yes, vaccine enhancement exists, but, there's been no sign of that in any of the early phase trials, and hundreds of thousands of people have already taken various vaccines. Tens of thousands for each candidate. For all responsible vaccines (oxford, moderna etc) the risk of vaccine enhancement is considered to be low/rare because they have already given the vaccine to tens of thousands of people, and any reports of it would be trumpeted to the heavens, considering we saw days of breathless reporting last week about 5 people getting bad headaches and poor sleep for a few days after being vaccinated.
If the vaccine works, great. If it doesn't, then my risk is the same. And considering there's a solid chance it may work, even if it is only say, 30% effective, we already know that Coronavirus itself causes some unpleasant rare long term side effects (Also death) so I'd rather roll the dice there. We've had extensive discussion here about long term side effects of Coronavirus, and while we don't know much yet due to primarily anecdotal reports, or horribly skewed small data sets, its safe to say that at LEAST 1/10000 people infected will have highly unpleasant lingering effects beyond the 3 month mark. (again, at least, and if you correctly argue that my 3 month and 1/10000 numbers are probably too low then all you are doing is arguing even MORE that you should get vaccinated ASAP).
Its pretty easy to run the numbers and decide the right bet is on being vaccinated asap, and then behaving as if you haven't been.
But, it's all a moot point, because vaccines will be compulsory and 'no-one' (excluding healthcare personnel etc) is going to be able to get one for at least 3-6 months even in a highly optimistic world. So you're going to have to take it, and your going to have months of safety. and efficacy data to pore over before you can get your compulsory shot.
However, of course I believe that all the above is true, but that the risks to the general public of a rushed vaccine are still very large, because if we did have a 'rushed' vaccine (for good or bad reasons) there would be no communication of the fact that "We think this probably works, maybe 30-60% of the time, so, take it but then keep behaving exactly the same until we can dose almost everyone" and instead all the vaccinated people would be told, 'You are fine now, do whatever you want", which would lead to tens of thousands of additional deaths, with many amongst the vaccinated, even if the vaccine DOES have a solid effect at the 50% level.
Honestly, while I have high hopes for a vaccine, and low concerns that the vaccine itself will do us harm even if it is rushed. I have great concerns that the messaging about vaccines and how they work will be poorly delivered, poorly understood, and do us great harm.
My worry is not a rushed vaccine. My worry is bad messaging and vaccination strategy, and a rushed and half formed distribution strategy accompanied by legions of antivaxxers and breathless news articles reporting every case in a vaccinated person. And that that bad strategy might lead to an even harder situation in getting people to take the vaccine, because of the perception it didn't work even if it does work.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
0
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
There is some serious false equivalence in your logic. Assuming that [COVID-19 has lingering side effects] is equivalent to [This improperly vetted vaccine causes lingering side effects] are an equivalent risk is not the same, because the risk is aggregate, especially in your example where you assume it is only 30-60% effective. That isn't mitigating harm, its causing additional harm for more people.
You wait until a properly tested and vetted vaccine comes out, full stop.
Taking a vaccine would mean admitting there was a problem.
This is it right here
Vaccination against COVID is like mask use to folks in Trumpland
Holy fuck I just realized that if/when we get a good vaccine all these dipshits aren’t goi g to take it and all the people who can’t get vaccinated will still be at risk
I keep joking with my wife that I'm going to demand health services give me whatever vaccine one of our senior scientists got once it is available. But, yes, it'll be first responders and military getting it first, I'd expect, so that's going to be the mass scale safety test. The military already gets lots of vaccines 'normal' people don't get.
Taking a vaccine would mean admitting there was a problem.
This is it right here
Vaccination against COVID is like mask use to folks in Trumpland
Holy fuck I just realized that if/when we get a good vaccine all these dipshits aren’t goi g to take it and all the people who can’t get vaccinated will still be at risk
This.
We will never be fully rid of Corona.
There's no plan, there's no race to be run
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
+6
Options
Monkey Ball WarriorA collection of mediocre hatsSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
Taking a vaccine would mean admitting there was a problem.
This is it right here
Vaccination against COVID is like mask use to folks in Trumpland
Holy fuck I just realized that if/when we get a good vaccine all these dipshits aren’t goi g to take it and all the people who can’t get vaccinated will still be at risk
This.
We will never be fully rid of Corona.
No, if the vaccine is very effective (or if a very effective second+ gen vaccine comes out), then it would be possible to eradicate it. Not easy, or cheap, but possible. You get the numbers down enough that contact tracing works, and you trace and isolate. Eventually nobody is contagious and the virus is extinct.
Obviously we could have done this back in April and saved hundreds of thousands of lives. But from where we are now it will take a polio-level decade long project. But it is at least feasible.
Monkey Ball Warrior on
"I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
Pretty much most of the democratic unwillingness to take the vaccine would come down to the fact that we're now aware that the CDC has been politicized and thus there are real questions about whether a vaccine works and is reasonable safe. After all, for all we know it doesn't work or was rushed because the goal some shithead wanted was to have an excuse reopen things or make Trump look good.
It's going to be a more mixed bag with republicans. There is a certain degree of anti-vaxxer nonsense and that seems noticeable higher on the republican side than the democratic side. There are people that don't want the vaccine, not because they are some idiot anti-vaxxer, but either believe covid is a hoax or think taking a vaccine is admitting that it is a serious problem. You also have a number that won't take it for the reason most democrats won't, they strongly suspect that the CDC is no longer thoroughly vetting it and that opens them up to a serious risk.
Independents are in a similar boat to republicans.
The poll really shows how the republicans have undermined public trust in the CDC.
Posts
She says she had it in the summer, right? Did her kids not get it too? I guess everyone manages their families in different ways, but I can't imagine someone getting it in our house (or, for that matter, most people I know), without everyone else getting it.
I honestly haven't been following developments in understanding of transmission, for some time, but can someone who's had it still be a spreader again; particularly so soon?
I'm not trying to imply that it might not be a big deal, because it is a big deal, whether or not they've had it, even if it's purely a matter of example and modeling good behavior. I'm just genuinely curious about if we know to any degree, if the kids are probably not at risk for spreading it, or even catching it again, or whether or not it's just stupidity all around, everywhere, by everyone.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
She believes a party that believes it doesn't infect the young. I mean hell Katie Miller got covid back in the spring and her husband just caught it recently.
Basically she's got shit judgement and possibly infected her own kids for a chance to rip healthcare and abortions from people.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Michael J. Stern is a USAToday columnist.
I know she has stupid beliefs. I'm just asking if the medical and scientific understanding of how the virus is transmitted, particularly by people who have already been infected, indicates that this specific issue indicates irresponsibility because they could potentially still transmit, or irresponsibility simply because they're setting a stupid shitty example (or both!).
I mean, we know she had it; or at least we know she claims to have. But do we know if her kids/husband did, also?
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
I dunno about the rest of you, but that's a trait I want on a lifetime judicial appointment.
She probably lives in a house where it would be possible to self isolate (spare bedroom with a bathroom).
I dunno, I would consider America lucky if it didn't work to be honest.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Maybe if a wildly successful vaccine makes it unnecessary.
If an antibody based therapy works, then a vaccine definitely will work, the inverse isn't necessarily true. The antibodies have to get to the right place in the right concentrations to be effective.
Edit - and clearly, if one doesn't work it doesn't mean nothing can work (antibody based treatments) but, the quicker we see a success the more confidence we can take that this virus doesn't have too many clever tricks up its sleeves.
Apparently, they are getting the rapid saliva tests on Monday.
Spoilers
Just the kind of thing to make me paranoid. "Oh no I've been having frequent urination what if it's happened to me." "No you fool you pee a lot because you drink a lot of water because you were already paranoid about getting the family kidney stones to the point that you turned 'Hydration is Important' into one of your personal mantras."
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Bad news good news...?
On a positive note my retail work place has hit month 3 of operation with no infections so distancing and masks are helping I guess? Also a no fault stay home and get tested and you get 2 weeks pay policy we are actually following. A few employees got exposed outside work and fortunately never had it but at least they were out with pay.
The current theory is vascular accident from a residual hypercoagulable state vs direct damage to end organs where the virus can infect, so heart attack and stroke vs cardiomyopathy and GI dysfunction. Also, there are a lot of secondary side effects to requiring intubation and fighting off a nasty infection, like weight loss, myopathy, encephalopathy, and secondary bacterial pulmonary infection.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Type 1 has a short "honeymoon" period where sometimes all of a sudden your pancreas starts functioning a little bit again(or fully) for a few days/a week or two. It's the last breaths and completely stops after this period. Doctors tell people who contract T1 to not get their hopes up.
There's a lot of other factors with t1 diabeties that are giant red flags, Generally you are frequently drinking because you have a unquenching thirst, and the frequent urination includes peeing in your sleep because your body is just trying to shed protiens/excess sugar, everything it can to regulate. When I was a kid I couldn't quench my thirst, but my mom caught on when I peed my bed two nights in a row and I was a young teenager. If it's t1 and took any loner I would have gotten severely ill. I'm lucky she knew the warning signs and took me to a doctor the second day and we caught it probably pretty early.
Plus you get tired super easy. In the period where I manifested symptoms but before I was diagnosed I got home from work around five, fell straight into bed and didn't wake up until five the next morning.
How the heck is Republican willingness to take the vaccine still lower than Democratic willingness?
This isn't a measure of faith in science, but faith in the Trump CDC.
Like a lot of the democrat logic is “I don’t want to take this because coronavirus is only 6 months old and that just isn’t enough time to make a safe vaccine.” Whereas for republicans and independents, some of the resistance is that, but you also get the “I don’t want to take any vaccines because that’s how the satan worshippers in the government give you autism” people mixed in as well.
Its getting cold.
I think this is it right here. I think a large chunk of democrats aren't necessarily anti-vax/anti-science, it's just that we've been aware of the CDC becoming completely co-opted and politicized and we're also more acutely aware that a vaccine simply can't be reliably developed in just 6-9 months that we'd be comfortable taking.
Wud yoo laek to lern aboot meatz? Look here!
Would I take a vaccine that Trump forced out in a rush to beat an election? Only with an actual gun to my head.
Once I sign that sweet supplemental disability insurance plan
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Just make sure it's one that's not voided by irresponsible acts, like motorcycles or parachuting. Or taking an rushed politically motivated vaccine.
Make sure you pay for it directly and not through an employer! It's not considered income if you have to claim it and paid for it yoursel!
The part of vaccine development which is long and complex is...
1) Showing that it works
2) Showing that it doesn't have some incredibly rare 1/100,000 side effect
Showing that it doesn't kill you or make you frequently horribly ill in the first 2 months isn't hard once you have the volunteers and the trial doses, which all the big name vaccines do. And to me, the latter two are risks worth taking considering Coronavirus exists and I could be infected at any time. Yes, vaccine enhancement exists, but, there's been no sign of that in any of the early phase trials, and hundreds of thousands of people have already taken various vaccines. Tens of thousands for each candidate. For all responsible vaccines (oxford, moderna etc) the risk of vaccine enhancement is considered to be low/rare because they have already given the vaccine to tens of thousands of people, and any reports of it would be trumpeted to the heavens, considering we saw days of breathless reporting last week about 5 people getting bad headaches and poor sleep for a few days after being vaccinated.
If the vaccine works, great. If it doesn't, then my risk is the same. And considering there's a solid chance it may work, even if it is only say, 30% effective, we already know that Coronavirus itself causes some unpleasant rare long term side effects (Also death) so I'd rather roll the dice there. We've had extensive discussion here about long term side effects of Coronavirus, and while we don't know much yet due to primarily anecdotal reports, or horribly skewed small data sets, its safe to say that at LEAST 1/10000 people infected will have highly unpleasant lingering effects beyond the 3 month mark. (again, at least, and if you correctly argue that my 3 month and 1/10000 numbers are probably too low then all you are doing is arguing even MORE that you should get vaccinated ASAP).
Its pretty easy to run the numbers and decide the right bet is on being vaccinated asap, and then behaving as if you haven't been.
But, it's all a moot point, because vaccines will be compulsory and 'no-one' (excluding healthcare personnel etc) is going to be able to get one for at least 3-6 months even in a highly optimistic world. So you're going to have to take it, and your going to have months of safety. and efficacy data to pore over before you can get your compulsory shot.
However, of course I believe that all the above is true, but that the risks to the general public of a rushed vaccine are still very large, because if we did have a 'rushed' vaccine (for good or bad reasons) there would be no communication of the fact that "We think this probably works, maybe 30-60% of the time, so, take it but then keep behaving exactly the same until we can dose almost everyone" and instead all the vaccinated people would be told, 'You are fine now, do whatever you want", which would lead to tens of thousands of additional deaths, with many amongst the vaccinated, even if the vaccine DOES have a solid effect at the 50% level.
Honestly, while I have high hopes for a vaccine, and low concerns that the vaccine itself will do us harm even if it is rushed. I have great concerns that the messaging about vaccines and how they work will be poorly delivered, poorly understood, and do us great harm.
My worry is not a rushed vaccine. My worry is bad messaging and vaccination strategy, and a rushed and half formed distribution strategy accompanied by legions of antivaxxers and breathless news articles reporting every case in a vaccinated person. And that that bad strategy might lead to an even harder situation in getting people to take the vaccine, because of the perception it didn't work even if it does work.
You wait until a properly tested and vetted vaccine comes out, full stop.
This is it right here
Vaccination against COVID is like mask use to folks in Trumpland
Holy fuck I just realized that if/when we get a good vaccine all these dipshits aren’t goi g to take it and all the people who can’t get vaccinated will still be at risk
This.
We will never be fully rid of Corona.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
No, if the vaccine is very effective (or if a very effective second+ gen vaccine comes out), then it would be possible to eradicate it. Not easy, or cheap, but possible. You get the numbers down enough that contact tracing works, and you trace and isolate. Eventually nobody is contagious and the virus is extinct.
Obviously we could have done this back in April and saved hundreds of thousands of lives. But from where we are now it will take a polio-level decade long project. But it is at least feasible.
It's going to be a more mixed bag with republicans. There is a certain degree of anti-vaxxer nonsense and that seems noticeable higher on the republican side than the democratic side. There are people that don't want the vaccine, not because they are some idiot anti-vaxxer, but either believe covid is a hoax or think taking a vaccine is admitting that it is a serious problem. You also have a number that won't take it for the reason most democrats won't, they strongly suspect that the CDC is no longer thoroughly vetting it and that opens them up to a serious risk.
Independents are in a similar boat to republicans.
The poll really shows how the republicans have undermined public trust in the CDC.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.