Coronavirus

[Gameface]

Nah you've just done it for me thnx. If you really think this is the same as "any medical procedure" that has much broader criteria and numbers and timeframe to study any long term effects then yeah you really are even more stupid that how smug you are. And for a disease that barely causes healthy 5-11 year olds symptoms more than a cold the ethical questions in dispersing such a treatment given the benefit is worth more than a sneering smart arse comment.

You're quite the condescending smug ****.

Vaccines are very simple medicines. The way they work has very little chance of causing major issues in the vast majority of people. Vaccines have been one of the most successful, most reliable and most effective treatments for major viral infections for more than half a century.

People take boner pills, SSRIs, hormones, and opioids like ****ing candy and then get all "I want to know what I'm putting in my body" when you offer them a ****ing vaccine. These same people often drink, smoke, do recreational drugs, drink 128 ounces of diet soda a day, and don't wash their hands after touching public door knobs. Stop pretending like you give a **** about what you put in your body.

How ****ing dumb are people?

EDIT: one more thing, the same anti-vax idiots on the far right also like to dismantle regulations about the things industry can pump into the air we breathe, the water we drink and the soil in which we grow our food, because freedom. Then they want to throw a tantrum about their freedom to not wear a mask and to not get a vaccine. Grow the **** up.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Vaccines are very simple medicines. The way they work has very little chance of causing major issues in the vast majority of people. Vaccines have been one of the most successful, most reliable and most effective treatments for major viral infections for more than half a century.

People take boner pills, SSRIs, hormones, and opioids like ****ing candy and then get all "I want to know what I'm putting in my body" when you offer them a ****ing vaccine. These same people often drink, smoke, do recreational drugs, drink 128 ounces of diet soda a day, and don't wash their hands after touching public door knobs. Stop pretending like you give a **** about what you put in your body.

How ****ing dumb are people?

EDIT: one more thing, the same anti-vax idiots on the far right also like to dismantle regulations about the things industry can pump into the air we breathe, the water we drink and the soil in which we grow our food, because freedom. Then they want to throw a tantrum about their freedom to not wear a mask and to not get a vaccine. Grow the **** up.

Not to mention, a lot of the drugs and antivirals to treat Covid are much more dangerous then the vaccine.

On top of that, if you end up needing a ventilator, it is quite common for Covid patients (and other vent patients) to be given a paralytic. Odds of getting off a vent once on it are very low, and spending final days agonizing on a vent while paralyzed is not the way I'd like to go. The vaccine has been proven to be highly effective against hospitalization or the need of a vent.

And while Covid does not hit kids as hard, hospitals are seeing a lot more kids with the Delta variant (some otherwise healthy).

I don't think we should force the vaccine on anyone, and won't say you aren't patriotic if you do not get it. Maybe less courteous to your fellow man, but nothing that society should require.

Having seen the strain unvaccinated have put on our medical community, and the stress and anxiety it has put on our medical providers alone is bad enough. My wife is current doing rounds in the ER and with multiple Covid patients dying per week (and often per day) she is at her emotional limit.

And as stated earlier, doctors and other medical providers are pretty pissed about it. And while I know they do their best to treat every patient as a human (including convicted murderers), they are human, and I would not want my chart having a glaring red flag to in any way stoke anger in a person(s) I am depending on to save my life.

I will say that most people not getting it seem very uninformed as I have not heard any compelling arguments why one shouldn't get the vaccine.

And even those that are somewhat more informed still baffle me.

It seems comparable to a situation where you have to get across a roaring class IV river to avoid an impending natural disaster. You can take the bridge, which statistics posted by the bridge based on peer reviewed testing to date by the Corps of Engineers show safety of 99.9% or you can swim, which we know many will get across, but many also die (say 2-3% chance of death) as well as much higher morbidity factors.

It seems like a lot of people still want to swim. Some because they don't want to be forced to take the bridge, others seem to be convinced by a guy in a van down by the river telling people they shouldn't take the bridge based on some unproven tale (let's say a bridge troll) even though the government and other professionals have documented the bridge's safety and if you take the time to inspect the bridge from the bank there is clearly no troll other than the van guy spouting false information.

Hopefully cases continue to decline (we'll see what being more indoors in winter does) and we can move past the pandemic in the near future.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

These same people often drink, smoke, do recreational drugs, drink 128 ounces of diet soda a day, and don't wash their hands after touching public door knobs. Stop pretending like you give a **** about what you put in your body.

How ****ing dumb are people?

Those who drink, smoke, and do recreational drugs don't typically force their kids to smoke or stuff recreational drugs down their kid's throats. In fact we have laws against it.

Handlogten's Heros has said getting his kids vaccinated is reasonable but wants to wait for 12 months or so for more data to come in first. Fishonjazz is talking about his young daughter. Douchebag K made clear he's talking about 5-11 year old kids in the snip you quoted. My wife is a scientist in the field of biology, is fully vaccinated as am I, and I've been extremely pro-vaccine on this board but there is no way our kid will be getting the Pfizer vaccine anytime soon because we understand math.

I want to take a moment to make sure I understand your comment. Are you calling parents expressing concerns "****ing dumb" because they have a double standard? Or did you take Douchebag K's comment about 5-11 year old kids, see that it wasn't a full-throated endorsement and use that as an excuse to generally attack antivaxxers even though his comment, nor Handlogten's Heros' comments, nor One Brow's comments, nor Fishonjazz's comments were about being antivaxxers?

 

[Al-O-Meter]

most people not getting it seem very uninformed as I have not heard any compelling arguments why one shouldn't get the vaccine.

Here is your compelling reason: because the vaccine is dangerous to young kids.

We know the vaccine is dangerous because the initial trials on young kids went badly and they stopped them to reduce the dose. You don't reduce the dose on a thing that isn't dangerous. You reduce the dose of a dangerous thing to reduce the danger.

We know the danger to fully healthy kids in the 5-11 age range from COVID is extremely low. We have a good gauge on that danger because we have a sample size in the hundreds of millions. We know the vaccine is dangerous to fully healthy kids in the 5-11 age range but we don't know exactly how much danger because we only have a sample size in the low thousands. Due to the extremely low risk to fully healthy kids in the 5-11 cohort, it isn't imprudent to want to see more data come in on the danger introduced by the COVID vaccine before subjecting your fully healthy 5-11 year-old kid to that danger.

 

[One Brow]

Even the FDA is admitting they don't know that.

Always nice to know who to count on for ignorant, cherry-picking quote mines.

 

[One Brow]

I just want time and more proven use of THIS PARTICULAR VACCINE before giving it to my kids. I apologize if my asymptomatic kid gives someone covid and may have a small chance of forcing them to make a hospital visit.

If this vaccine has been around for 35+ years then why is it only emergency use currently. Why even test it.

The technology for this vaccines has been around for decades, but every new use of medical technology comes with strict testing protocols.

I'm gathering info... will make the best decision for the kids and the community. Not "doing my own research" but will talk with doctors and others I know personally.

I certainly wouldn't ask for anything more.

 

[One Brow]

Nah you've just done it for me thnx. If you really think this is the same as "any medical procedure" that has much broader criteria and numbers and timeframe to study any long term effects then yeah you really are even more stupid that how smug you are.

I disagree. I am much more smug than stupid.

As for criteria and numbers, the numbers here are pretty typical for clinical trials of new medications, and the vaccine has been given yo hundreds of millions of adults. Do you have a specific process of interaction that would play out in children and not adults?

And for a disease that barely causes healthy 5-11 year olds symptoms more than a cold the ethical questions in dispersing such a treatment given the benefit is worth more than a sneering smart arse comment.

When you start upping your game past sneering comments, I will respond to you in knid.

You're quite the condescending smug ****.

Next, try announcing the color of the sky. We would all like to hear you say it.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Here is your compelling reason: because the vaccine is dangerous to young kids.

We know the vaccine is dangerous because the initial trials on young kids went badly and they stopped them to reduce the dose. You don't reduce the dose on a thing that isn't dangerous. You reduce the dose of a dangerous thing to reduce the danger.

We know the danger to fully healthy kids in the 5-11 age range from COVID is extremely low. We have a good gauge on that danger because we have a sample size in the hundreds of millions. We know the vaccine is dangerous to fully healthy kids in the 5-11 age range but we don't know exactly how much danger because we only have a sample size in the low thousands. Due to the extremely low risk to fully healthy kids in the 5-11 cohort, it isn't imprudent to want to see more data come in on the danger introduced by the COVID vaccine before subjecting your fully healthy 5-11 year-old kid to that danger.

The initial phase dosage was changed for adults too after some people had severe reactions (none life threatening).

There is a difference between a trial going badly vs expected adjustments for overall tolerability and efficacy. Where is this data about it going badly and being dangerous? Been talking to Chris Farley?

And while Covid is low risk to kids (we saw much higher hospitalizations with the Delta strain), our childrens hospital had had many extreme cases in otherwise healthy kids.

It is the vaccine that actually has extremely low risk for kids. No kids have died from the vaccine. The myocarditis and perocarditis that a small number of kids had found only one kid that had potential lasting issues all others recovered 100%.

And know that myocarditis and perocarditis are caused by Covid 19 at a much higher level. Along with stroke and other factors.

The death risk is low for kids with Covid, but now low enough, but that should not be the key focus.

The morbidity risks are even higher from Covid-19, and I don't want any of my loved ones to deal with the morbidity issues that Covid is causing at fairly high levels.

 

[One Brow]

We know the vaccine is dangerous because the initial trials on young kids went badly and they stopped them to reduce the dose.

The dose was 10 mcg at the start of the Phase 2 trials, and it is still 10 mcg.

The Phase 1 trials did have a wide range of doses, because that's what Phase 1 trials do; Phase 1 is deliberately looking for how well a system can tolerate the medicine at various dosages

It's been widely reported that young adults had a higher rate of side effects than older adults. No one was surprised that the dose for children would need to be reduced.

Finally, a higher rate of side effects (which does not seem to be the case at the current dosage) does not mean less safe.

 

[leftyjace]

We are going to get our boosters today!

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Vaccines are very simple medicines. The way they work has very little chance of causing major issues in the vast majority of people. Vaccines have been one of the most successful, most reliable and most effective treatments for major viral infections for more than half a century.

People take boner pills, SSRIs, hormones, and opioids like ****ing candy and then get all "I want to know what I'm putting in my body" when you offer them a ****ing vaccine. These same people often drink, smoke, do recreational drugs, drink 128 ounces of diet soda a day, and don't wash their hands after touching public door knobs. Stop pretending like you give a **** about what you put in your body.

How ****ing dumb are people?

EDIT: one more thing, the same anti-vax idiots on the far right also like to dismantle regulations about the things industry can pump into the air we breathe, the water we drink and the soil in which we grow our food, because freedom. Then they want to throw a tantrum about their freedom to not wear a mask and to not get a vaccine. Grow the **** up.

There is truth to this but kids are different… for instance my kids don’t take boner pills… at least not until they are 12+

 

[Al-O-Meter]

know that myocarditis and perocarditis are caused by Covid 19 at a much higher level.

First, it is not a “much” higher level, and even that is dishonesty through statistics because it relies on the trick of lumping all ages together to make that claim. Post-vaccination myocarditis affects younger people, and particularly younger males at a much higher rate than the general population. If you are looking at young kids, and especially young male kids, your statement is false.

Here are the numbers:

We see a heavy increase in the risk to young males. The risk to women over 30 and men over 50 is effectively nothing, but those group represent the overwhelming number of vaccines given which allows the technically true but misleading-in-the-context-of-children claim of "myocarditis and perocarditis are caused by Covid 19 at a much higher level".

This data show that for males aged 30-39, the risk is roughly 1 in 140k. For males aged 25-29 the risk rises to 1 in 60k. For males aged 18-24 the risk rises again to 1 in 20k. For males aged 12-17, the reported rate is 1 in 16k, but it is important to note those aged 16 and 17 are vastly over-sampled due to vaccines being open to them far longer than the younger members of that group.

Let me ask you to do some back-of-the-napkin math. You can see the curve increasing for younger males, and you can see the rates they are finding with the next cohort up seeing 1 case of myocarditis for every 15,936 vaccinations. With that rate, how many cases of myocarditis should you detect if you run a sample of 2,200 kids aged 5-11 for your vaccine efficacy study? Zero, right? With a sample size that small, you'd statistically expect to find zero. That isn't what they found.

Along with stroke and other factors.

If you are claiming your local hospital is full of kids aged 5-11 who have had strokes induced by SARS-CoV-2, I'm calling B.S. If you meant that comment to imply that adults are at a higher risk of stroke in this discussion over risk to 5-11 year old kids, then I'd say that argument isn't constructive but rather deliberately deceptive.

 

[Archie Moses]

Vaccines are very simple medicines. The way they work has very little chance of causing major issues in the vast majority of people. Vaccines have been one of the most successful, most reliable and most effective treatments for major viral infections for more than half a century.

People take boner pills, SSRIs, hormones, and opioids like ****ing candy and then get all "I want to know what I'm putting in my body" when you offer them a ****ing vaccine. These same people often drink, smoke, do recreational drugs, drink 128 ounces of diet soda a day, and don't wash their hands after touching public door knobs. Stop pretending like you give a **** about what you put in your body.

How ****ing dumb are people?

EDIT: one more thing, the same anti-vax idiots on the far right also like to dismantle regulations about the things industry can pump into the air we breathe, the water we drink and the soil in which we grow our food, because freedom. Then they want to throw a tantrum about their freedom to not wear a mask and to not get a vaccine. Grow the **** up.

Lol.

Good post.

How dumb are people? Yes.

I don't think anyone should be forced to be vaccinated and I think it's ridiculous people lose their jobs because of it.

Don't get me wrong, I think they're idiots, but damn - I gotta support freedom at the end of the day, even if I disagree.

 

[Archie Moses]

I acknowledge your feeling. I disagree.

Of course you do.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

First, it is not a “much” higher level, and even that is dishonesty through statistics because it relies on the trick of lumping all ages together to make that claim. Post-vaccination myocarditis affects younger people, and particularly younger males at a much higher rate than the general population. If you are looking at young kids, and especially young male kids, your statement is false.

Here are the numbers:

We see a heavy increase in the risk to young males. The risk to women over 30 and men over 50 is effectively nothing, but those group represent the overwhelming number of vaccines given which allows the technically true but misleading-in-the-context-of-children claim of "myocarditis and perocarditis are caused by Covid 19 at a much higher level".

This data show that for males aged 30-39, the risk is roughly 1 in 140k. For males aged 25-29 the risk rises to 1 in 60k. For males aged 18-24 the risk rises again to 1 in 20k. For males aged 12-17, the reported rate is 1 in 16k, but it is important to note those aged 16 and 17 are vastly over-sampled due to vaccines being open to them far longer than the younger members of that group.

Let me ask you to do some back-of-the-napkin math. You can see the curve increasing for younger males, and you can see the rates they are finding with the next cohort up seeing 1 case of myocarditis for every 15,936 vaccinations. With that rate, how many cases of myocarditis should you detect if you run a sample of 2,200 kids aged 5-11 for your vaccine efficacy study? Zero, right? With a sample size that small, you'd statistically expect to find zero. That isn't what they found.

If you are claiming your local hospital is full of kids aged 5-11 who have had strokes induced by SARS-CoV-2, I'm calling B.S. If you meant that comment to imply that adults are at a higher risk of stroke in this discussion over risk to 5-11 year old kids, then I'd say that argument isn't constructive but rather deliberately deceptive.

First, check your math, it does not jive with the provided data.

Secondl, as clearly notes, I was talking about all morbidity factors. As I have mentioned before, MIS-C occurs in 316 kids per 1 million infected, which can be much more dangerous.

There are many morbidities, and yes, our children's ICU was full last month, which forced Shriner's to delay many needed surgeries due to the lack of ICU bed space (protocol to ensure ICU is available if any surgeries have complications).

Enjoy your swim.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Enjoy your swim.

I want to apologize for my earlier tone. It came off a lot more harsh than intended. Way, WAY more harsh than intended.

That said, the statistics you are citing have a lot of issues. The Payne, et al study only found 8 incidents for those aged 4-13 across 7 states. They then extrapolated that into the number you gave by multiplying it by the true number of 4-13 year old kids infected. That would be fine if we knew that number, but we don't and the models estimating that number vary wildly. The researchers could pick whatever study they wanted. The one they chose was from 18 months ago, and the only reason I can imagine for picking a study that old was because it gave numbers that hiked the per-1m number the most.

The bottom line is this, in that study they only found 8 incidents in an huge population that included New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Georgia, and Connecticut. In the vaccine trials given to only 2,200 kids, they came up with 9 incidents. What will happen when the vaccine is given to millions of kids? I don't know but I am going to sit back and watch before I line my kid up for that shot. Myocarditis is the dangerous part of MIS-C so this very much is apples-to-apples.

If you have young kids, you see those statistics, and you still want to inject your kid then I won't stand in your way or disparage you. If you don't have young kids but instead want to use your franchise to get the government to do that to my kid against my will, then we're going to have some words.

 

[Gameface]

Lol.

Good post.

How dumb are people? Yes.

I don't think anyone should be forced to be vaccinated and I think it's ridiculous people lose their jobs because of it.

Don't get me wrong, I think they're idiots, but damn - I gotta support freedom at the end of the day, even if I disagree.

I'm conflicted on this issue because I agree that people shouldn't be forced to get a vaccine. I'm just frustrated because the number of people making the wrong choice on this is so large. That puts all of us at greater risk. This isn't just a decision they are making for themselves, it is a decision that can mean that the virus mutates a few more times and potentially overcomes the vaccine and/or becomes much more deadly.

 

[Gameface]

Those who drink, smoke, and do recreational drugs don't typically force their kids to smoke or stuff recreational drugs down their kid's throats. In fact we have laws against it.

Handlogten's Heros has said getting his kids vaccinated is reasonable but wants to wait for 12 months or so for more data to come in first. Fishonjazz is talking about his young daughter. Douchebag K made clear he's talking about 5-11 year old kids in the snip you quoted. My wife is a scientist in the field of biology, is fully vaccinated as am I, and I've been extremely pro-vaccine on this board but there is no way our kid will be getting the Pfizer vaccine anytime soon because we understand math.

I want to take a moment to make sure I understand your comment. Are you calling parents expressing concerns "****ing dumb" because they have a double standard? Or did you take Douchebag K's comment about 5-11 year old kids, see that it wasn't a full-throated endorsement and use that as an excuse to generally attack antivaxxers even though his comment, nor Handlogten's Heros' comments, nor One Brow's comments, nor Fishonjazz's comments were about being antivaxxers?

I understand the discussion has been about kids getting the vaccine. I wasn't talking about that specifically, just about the hypocrisy that I see from your general anti-vaxer.

 

[fishonjazz]

I understand the discussion has been about kids getting the vaccine. I wasn't talking about that specifically, just about the hypocrisy that I see from your general anti-vaxer.

Like one of my co workers who was like "Im not putting that crap in my body, who knows what damage it could do to my health?" Meanwhile he smokes 2 packs of cigarettes per day and we literally do know what that could do to someones health.

 

[Gameface]

Like one of my co workers who was like "Im not putting that crap in my body, who knows what damage it could do to my health?" Meanwhile he smokes 2 packs of cigarettes per day and we literally do know what that could do to someones health.

Tell him, Well there's a really good chance it will give you cancer. Not as much of a chance that you get from smoking, but still a pretty big possibility. So now that you know what it will do I guess you're all set to go get vaccinated, right?