All things political. Coronavirus Edition. (1 Viewer)

[Maxp]

I fear we are really going to be in a bad place due to the obvious cuts to the federal agencies that deal with infectious disease, but also the negative effect the Affordable Care act has had on non urban hospitals. Our front line defenses are ineffectual and our ability to treat the populous is probably at an all time low. Factor in the cost of healthcare and I can see our system crashing. What do you think about the politics of this virus?

 

[Goatman saint]

Actually surprised it’s that high

 

[MT15]

I do think the antivaxxers and conspiracy theory nuts are probably less than 25% of the population. They’re just so freaking loud and “in your face” about it and they have scared an entire political party out of their wits. It’s the tail wagging the dog.

 

[samiam5211]

I do think the antivaxxers and conspiracy theory nuts are probably less than 25% of the population. They’re just so freaking loud and “in your face” about it and they have scared an entire political party out of their wits. It’s the tail wagging the dog.

25% is a frightening number though.

Before the internet i'd say it was closer to 2.5 percent. I do not like the trend.

 

[UriUT]

25% is a frightening number though.

Before the internet i'd say it was closer to 2.5 percent. I do not like the trend.

Interesting point about market information vs regulated. One of the first assignment for a computer science class I took was to read an article about technology and its effects on our liberties and laws.

 

[DaveXA]

Coincidentally...

I'm a white "sorta" evangelical. 57% is embarrassing. Terrible.

 

[samiam5211]

Interesting point about market information vs regulated. One of the first assignment for a computer science class I took was to read an article about technology and its effects on our liberties and laws.

Yea, we have to hope that the people born into this world will be better able to deal with it, and once all of us who remember rotary phones are gone, people will have misinformation antibodies.

it's quite a bit like the time right after the printing press was invented.

 

[MT15]

25% is a frightening number though.

Before the internet i'd say it was closer to 2.5 percent. I do not like the trend.

True, that’s much higher than I thought before all this happened. I am clinging to the hope that there is a ceiling and we are there.

 

[superchuck500]

This is illustrative:

 

[MT15]

This is for Farb, and anyone else thinking that just because they had Covid they don’t need to be vaccinated.

MYTH: I already had COVID, therefore I don’t need the vaccine. I’m immune.

Assoumou: That’s a very common one. The information we have right now is that vaccines provide a more broad-based immune response that will protect you for a longer period of time. With the mRNA vaccines, you have two shots, one to prime and then another one to boost the immune system. You need the boost to protect you for a longer period of time.

Hamer: After three to six months or so, the natural immunity begins to wane and the risk of reinfection returns. We are definitely seeing people develop reinfections. Receiving the vaccine after having COVID is like a booster effect, and therefore it’s much more effective. Studies have been done comparing those who had the disease versus those who did not, and those who got at least one shot after having COVID end up with very high levels of antibodies.

Source:
So let’s cut to the chase. Myth vs. Fact. The Brink took some of the most widespread myths to two leading infectious disease experts, Davidson Hamer, a faculty member of BU’s School of Public Health, School of Medicine, and National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories, and Sabrina Assoumou, a BU School of Medicine assistant professor of medicine and of infectious diseases and a Boston Medical Center physician.

Myths vs. Facts: Making Sense of COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation

With so much wrong information circulating, convincing people to get vaccinated has proven a huge challenge

www.bu.edu

I would listen to these leading infectious disease experts over a local doctor. Just my opinion.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

This is illustrative:

You can do map after map like this all around the country. We are in an age of tribalized information, which is incredibly dangerous.

 

[MT15]

Sorry for mild thread jack, but I just saw this and it illustrates the tribal nature in the wild perfectly:



I noticed the way he initially claimed he had to cut him off because he was “out of time” and then after he was cut off he ranted for a good 30-40 seconds further. Guess he wasn’t out of time at all really.

 

[Farb]

This is for Farb, and anyone else thinking that just because they had Covid they don’t need to be vaccinated.

MYTH: I already had COVID, therefore I don’t need the vaccine. I’m immune.

Assoumou: That’s a very common one. The information we have right now is that vaccines provide a more broad-based immune response that will protect you for a longer period of time. With the mRNA vaccines, you have two shots, one to prime and then another one to boost the immune system. You need the boost to protect you for a longer period of time.

Hamer: After three to six months or so, the natural immunity begins to wane and the risk of reinfection returns. We are definitely seeing people develop reinfections. Receiving the vaccine after having COVID is like a booster effect, and therefore it’s much more effective. Studies have been done comparing those who had the disease versus those who did not, and those who got at least one shot after having COVID end up with very high levels of antibodies.

Source:
So let’s cut to the chase. Myth vs. Fact. The Brink took some of the most widespread myths to two leading infectious disease experts, Davidson Hamer, a faculty member of BU’s School of Public Health, School of Medicine, and National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories, and Sabrina Assoumou, a BU School of Medicine assistant professor of medicine and of infectious diseases and a Boston Medical Center physician.

Myths vs. Facts: Making Sense of COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation

With so much wrong information circulating, convincing people to get vaccinated has proven a huge challenge

www.bu.edu

I would listen to these leading infectious disease experts over a local doctor. Just my opinion.

Like this one:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/me...re-effective-then-vaccine-immunity/ar-AAMX3sM

What about the study from Israel?

I am sorry you guys believe that this is some red badge of courage to take a drug that was suppose to protect you but that turned out to be incorrect.

Does it offer protection? How much?

I am not going to take a drug when I don't need it to make you guys that have feel better. That is illogical to me. We all obviously process, evaluate and mitigate risk differently. Besides, if I die from this virus, one less Trumper in yalls playground.

 

[samiam5211]

Like this one:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/me...re-effective-then-vaccine-immunity/ar-AAMX3sM

What about the study from Israel?

I am sorry you guys believe that this is some red badge of courage to take a drug that was suppose to protect you but that turned out to be incorrect.

Does it offer protection? How much?

I am not going to take a drug when I don't need it to make you guys that have feel better. That is illogical to me. We all obviously process, evaluate and mitigate risk differently. Besides, if I die from this virus, one less Trumper in yalls playground.

You are afraid that the government or big pharma is trying to do something bad to you. it is irrational.

I don't really care, you're wrong about a ton of things, nothing we can do about it.

 

[coldseat]

Like this one:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/me...re-effective-then-vaccine-immunity/ar-AAMX3sM

What about the study from Israel?

I am sorry you guys believe that this is some red badge of courage to take a drug that was suppose to protect you but that turned out to be incorrect.

Does it offer protection? How much?

I am not going to take a drug when I don't need it to make you guys that have feel better. That is illogical to me. We all obviously process, evaluate and mitigate risk differently. Besides, if I die from this virus, one less Trumper in yalls playground.

Why do you believe it will make us feel better if you take the vaccine?

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

You are afraid that the government or big pharma is trying to do something bad to you. it is irrational.

Biggest flaw in people thinking that is they presume they are important enough for the government/big pharma to care about them.

Never mind we are about six months from people initially taking the vaccine and there's no evidence I've seen that it has negative effects. If there was in fact evidence of this you would think it would be getting widespread reporting on Fox or at least Newsmax/ONN/whatever. Reality is you just have a bunch of crackpots with the occasional social media link of how someone's father's brother's sister's nephew's former roommate turned purple and jumped off a cliff because of the vaccine.

You wonder how many years will toll by before people finally acknowledge the vaccine is safe and effective. If people don't want to take the vaccine for political reasons, that's fine, but be honest that it is purely for political reasons.

 

[Farb]

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02046-8/fulltext

“Although the benefits of primary COVID-19 vaccination clearly outweigh the risks, there could be risks if boosters are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines, or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines). If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, widespread boosting should be undertaken only if there is clear evidence that it is appropriate… Current evidence does not appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against severe disease remains high. Even if humoral immunity appears to wane, reductions in neutralizing antibody titre do not necessarily predict reductions in vaccine efficacy over time, and reductions in vaccine efficacy against mild disease do not necessarily predict reductions in the (typically higher) efficacy against severe disease.”

Here are few more of those experts that disagree with narrative.

 

[samiam5211]

Biggest flaw in people thinking that is they presume they are important enough for the government/big pharma to care about them.

Never mind we are about six months from people initially taking the vaccine and there's no evidence I've seen that it has negative effects. If there was in fact evidence of this you would think it would be getting widespread reporting on Fox or at least Newsmax/ONN/whatever. Reality is you just have a bunch of crackpots with the occasional social media link of how someone's father's brother's sister's nephew's former roommate turned purple and jumped off a cliff because of the vaccine.

You wonder how many years will toll by before people finally acknowledge the vaccine is safe and effective. If people don't want to take the vaccine for political reasons, that's fine, but be honest that it is purely for political reasons.

You'd think that having Niki Minaj lauded by their favorite talking heads would let them know something isn't quite right with their side.

 

[RebSaint]

You can do map after map like this all around the country. We are in an age of tribalized information, which is incredibly dangerous.

One of the things I've noticed is that the gerrymandering of information has followed the gerrymandering of the politics.