The Other Covid Thread

[sunstoned]

8 hours ago, Rivers said:

The biggest thing bothering me right now is the narrative that the unvaccinated are putting others at risk.  This is causing way too much confusion.  The vaccine isn’t significantly reducing the spread.  The vaccine protects the person being vaccinated by turning a potentially deadly disease into a cold.  So the unvaccinated are only putting themselves at risk.  Let’s stop demonizing them.  And when they get really sick, we support the hospitals taking care of them.  

This is true.  The unvaccinated are putting themselves at risk, but they are also filling up hospitals and taking beds away from others.  All because of their selfishness.

[sunstoned]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

 

Doctrinally, Latter-day Saints should be the last people on the planet to fall for 'I'm only harming myself' nonsense.

Agreed.  Also LDS should be following the counsel of the prophet with regards to vaccinations and masks.  

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 minute ago, sunstoned said:

Also LDS should be following the counsel of the prophet with regards to vaccinations and masks.  

No disagreement here. We overwhelmingly are in my ward/stake. 

[Rivers]

5 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Agreed.  Also LDS should be following the counsel of the prophet with regards to vaccinations and masks.  

I’m down with the vaccine part.  But I’m really sick of the masks.

[sunstoned]

Just now, Rivers said:

I’m down with the vaccine part.  But I’m really sick of the masks.

I'm sick of them too.  I have worn one for almost two years.  Now, because of omicron I now wear two masks, one of them is a N-95.  I have respiratory issues and the masks make it hard for me to breathe.  But I feel the alternative is much worse.

[Rivers]

33 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

This is true.  The unvaccinated are putting themselves at risk, but they are also filling up hospitals and taking beds away from others.  All because of their selfishness.

Maybe so.  But they’re still fellow children of God for whom we should have compassion.  I have to remind myself of this fact every night at work when I have to take care of them.  

 

 

 

[sunstoned]

34 minutes ago, Rivers said:

Maybe so.  But they’re still fellow children of God for whom we should have compassion.  I have to remind myself of this fact every night at work when I have to take care of them.  

 

 

 

Thank you for your medical service.  It must be hard during these trying times.  I try really hard to have compassion.  But sometimes it is a challenge.

[Calm]

This appears to say a major part of the workforce are actually sick and not just quarantined after testing positive with little or no symptoms.

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/18/1073139544/staffing-shortages-omicron-grocery-hospital-workers-nurses-employers-covid?

[Calm]

Better news otoh…

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-omicron-variant-south-africa-turning-point/?

[rodheadlee]

I'm at the county jail picking up someone in the middle of the night. It looks like a great place to pick up covid. I think I'll wait outside. Hey what are friends for?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

I'm at the county jail picking up someone in the middle of the night. It looks like a great place to pick up covid. I think I'll wait outside. Hey what are friends for?

I was just reading an article saying paramedics in Lehi are now telling many patients they need to come outside to be treated.  They don’t like that they have to tell someone sick to do this, but the payoff is the paramedic doesn’t get sick themselves and therefore is available to help others who are sick….but just crazy…

https://www.abc4.com/news/badge/behind-the-badge-how-covid-has-affected-firefighters-and-paramedics/

Quote

Our decontaminating process has gone from, maybe depending on the call,15 minutes to an hour and 15 minutes or maybe longer, depending on what we responded on,” says Freiberg.  

Freiberg said to reduce their odds of getting sick they now wear full protective equipment: gowns, masks, and gloves; and when they get to the scene, on something like a medical call, they don’t go inside the house anymore.

“We want to be careful about how many people we’re exposed to. We’re asking our patients as never before to come out to us which feels like poor customer service especially these patients who are sick and already don’t feel well, we’re asking them to do additional work when they’ve called us for help,” she explains.

Freiberg admits doing things like fully wiping down the ambulance afterward and running an infrared light to kill potential pathogens adds extra time after each call, but she doesn’t look at it as an extra burden. Freiberg feels while covid created chaos for other industries, that hasn’t been the case for them.

I admire her willingness to do the extra work rather than complain about it.

[Calm]

So back in my elementary school days there was a series called the 21st Century with Walter Cronkite that I loved as it showed predictions of what the future would be like.  Way off in many ways, but I remember it having remote schooling and work as the typical lifestyle for the middle class at least (I don’t remember it as addressing class differences, one of these days I am going to have to watch it again to see how well my memory matches).  Before Covid, it felt like that prediction was way off.  Now it seems like Covid has pushed the timeline for change in that direction into overdrive (though I think the feeling of kids being isolated will keep remote learning off the ‘typical lifestyle’ list for many more years, but it may increase the rate significantly just because more are aware of it and there are likely many more resources out there).  Telehealth was just starting out and Covid has really pushed its appeal way up.  Not sure it allows for more patients, but it saves so much in travel and wait time.  I have to have appointments every three months for one disorder and when nothing has changed, telehealth is perfect for those.

Maybe this deserves a thread of its own, but wondering what areas of life people think have been altered not because of medical concerns, but because Covid pushed innovations and getting out of ruts and changed perceptions…as in people know what it is like to work from home now and if they like it, that may become part of their job requirements which may change the way many businesses operate in the future, especially as office space in many cities is a high overhead expense.  Stores may shift to smaller inventories as people adapt to not having instant gratification (some in person stores are having problems as people come in to see what is available and then order from someone else online, cutting cost by cutting inventory makes sense for these types of stores).

One area of change…justice:

Utah is moving ahead with much more online interaction for the justice service.  The benefit of not having to wait in person is huge as well as the rural part of the state having more access.

https://www.ksl.com/article/50330501/utah-courts-will-still-hold-virtual-hearings-after-pandemic-chief-justice-says?

Quote

Due to the move to a largely virtual model, tens of thousands of people have been able to "fully engage" in court cases without needing to take time off from work. Attorneys, parties and witnesses in cases have avoided travel time and expenses due to the ability for them to appear remotely, Durrant said…

Those located in rural areas can also seek help from a broader array of attorneys across the state without needing to pay for travel, he added.

But the shift hasn't come without challenges — remote appearances sometimes slow down proceedings, background noise impacts the quality of court recordings, and technical issues have required IT staff members to work many hours to fix them, sometimes delaying hearings, the chief justice said.

The court system is working to address those issues and to develop "robust" judicial systems. As virtual proceedings will "almost certainly" be part of the system moving forward, Durrant emphasized the courts will work with stakeholders to determine the best ways to use virtual and in-person proceedings.

Quote

Through the new online Self-Help Center, the courts have allowed people to access court information virtually in one place. Court staff members and experts are available to provide online assistance, Durrant said.

Another pilot program, Online Dispute Resolution, allows those involved in small claims disputes to communicate with each other and an online facilitator to try to resolve their issues on mutually acceptable terms before they need to see a judge. Durrant said 28 justice courts across the state will be using the program by the end of this year.

The Office of Fairness and Accountability that formed last year has been working with underserved residents to better understand their needs and experiences, Durrant said, describing those relationships as "critical" to the courts.

The Utah Supreme Court is also seeking to reduce barriers to justice through the Office of Legal Services Innovation, which operates a regulatory sandbox, or controlled environment, that allows participants to seek regulatory waivers so they can offer legal services in "new and innovative ways," Durrant said. The program has approved 31 entities that are offering services.

For example, one group of attorneys that serves domestic violence victims asked nonlawyer victim advocates they work with to assist victims in attaining protective orders. Those advocates receive training and get supervised by lawyers, Durrant said.

Besides shopping, medical, the law….anyone else care to speculate on possible changes to the way we live that were either triggered by Covid or change to a new way was sped up significantly?  The weirder, the more obscure a the connection, the better.   

[Robert J Anderson]

17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Yep, I'll be supporting the unvaccinated through my insurance's just announced 9.2% premium increase.

How do you know that the rise is due to the unvaccinated?

[rongo]

16 minutes ago, Robert J Anderson said:

How do you know that the rise is due to the unvaccinated?

I've wondered about this (tangentially). My unvaccinated family has been just fine (more than fine) over the last two and now entering into the third year of this. We haven't been hospitalized or had any medical bills related to coronavirus. Despite the hospitalization statistics, I'm sure that millions more are in our exact situation (unvaccinated, have had it, but have never burdened the health care network) than have actually been hospitalized. Yes, most hospitalizations have been with unvaccinated people, but the CDC admitted last week that most of these had at least 4 comorbidities. 

I would say the comorbidities impact insurance premiums more than simply not being vaccinated against coronavirus. And, they disproportionately were responsible for most hospitalizations long before 2019 (smoking/vaping, drinking, overweight, etc.). And, of course, things that aren't anybody's fault (Type I diabetes, congenital problems, bad medical luck, etc.). 

How would underwriters calculate relative "blame" between unvaccinated and the existing comorbidities that have always severely undermined health and outlook?

[pogi]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

I've wondered about this (tangentially). My unvaccinated family has been just fine (more than fine) over the last two and now entering into the third year of this. We haven't been hospitalized or had any medical bills related to coronavirus. Despite the hospitalization statistics, I'm sure that millions more are in our exact situation (unvaccinated, have had it, but have never burdened the health care network) than have actually been hospitalized. Yes, most hospitalizations have been with unvaccinated people, but the CDC admitted last week that most of these had at least 4 comorbidities. 

I would say the comorbidities impact insurance premiums more than simply not being vaccinated against coronavirus. And, they disproportionately were responsible for most hospitalizations long before 2019 (smoking/vaping, drinking, overweight, etc.). And, of course, things that aren't anybody's fault (Type I diabetes, congenital problems, bad medical luck, etc.). 

How would underwriters calculate relative "blame" between unvaccinated and the existing comorbidities that have always severely undermined health and outlook?

The only variable that changed from pre-pandemic hospitalizations and now is the virus - not comorbidities.  The fact that the overwhelming increase in hospitalizations and deaths were almost entirely preventable with vaccination, even given the comorbidities, shows where the blame lies.  The cause - the virus.  The prevention - the vaccine.  Period.  Simple as that.  Yes, the unvaccinated are to blame.   Comorbidities are contributing factors, but not the factor that hospitalized or killed them.   The factor that hospitalized them and killed them was preventable, even given the comorbidities.  The virus is the cause and not getting vaccinated against that cause is to blame.  

The comorbidities are equivalent to driving a vehicle - there is inherent risk.   If there was a seat belt or other protective system in vehicles that could almost entirely prevent hospitalization and/or death in car accidents, that would be equivalent to the vaccine.  Let's say that protective measure was provided by the government in every vehicle, and all you had to do was choose to use it to be protected.    In that scenario, if millions and millions of people continue to be hospitalized and/or die from car accidents every year because they chose to drive without this protective measure available to them and already provided and paid for, would you say the blame lies on the fact that they chose to drive (comorbidities), or on the fact that they chose not to use the almost guaranteed protective measure (not vaccinated)? 

Edited January 19, 2022 by pogi

[bsjkki]

We knew this. Thanks for the vilification of the unvaccinated but naturally immune. The EU recognized natural immunity. Of course, it is not the 'safest' way to gain immunity. Don't go throw covid parties. But, for those who got covid and recovered, their immunity was longer lasting and more protective.

Jan 19 (Reuters) - People who had previously been infected with COVID-19 were better protected against the Delta variant than those who were vaccinated alone, suggesting that natural immunity was a more potent shield than vaccines against that variant, California and New York health officials reported on Wednesday.

 

Edited January 19, 2022 by bsjkki

[pogi]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

We knew this. Thanks for the vilification of the unvaccinated but naturally immune.

Jan 19 (Reuters) - People who had previously been infected with COVID-19 were better protected against the Delta variant than those who were vaccinated alone, suggesting that natural immunity was a more potent shield than vaccines against that variant, California and New York health officials reported on Wednesday.

 

I will never understand this logic of celebrating natural immunity (a.k.a unprotected "infection") over vaccination, as if it is better.  Shouldn't we consider the risks of acquiring the immunity from either source?  Which source of immunity is safer, and which one killed nearly 1 million Americans, hospitalized and/or debilitated countless millions, and jacked the crap out of the health care system and costed countless billions to treat?

How many people were hospitalized, died, had clots, or suffered debilitating long-term sequelae as a consequence of trying to acquire immunity in this manner - without protection?  They are looking at natural immunity like a safe source of protection, but if the vaccine was responsible for nearly a million deaths and countless millions of hospitalizations and debilitating long-Covid symptoms, but gave better antibodies than natural immunity against infection, would anyone say the vaccine is "better" or "safer"?  Of course not.  It is like drinking poison and saying "what doesn't kill me will make me stronger".  Ok, go drink your poison.  Good luck! 

Let's also not forget that one can acquire natural immunity after vaccination without all the risk of unprotected infection.  One can also get vaccine acquired immunity after natural infection for even more and longer-lasting protection than natural immunity alone.  there is no scenario where a vaccine is not indicated and more protective than natural immunity alone.    There is no contest here.  Vaccines win every time.  We don't need to vilify anyone, but we should educate the public about good health choices and poor health choices.  Sometimes people think that pointing out poor health choices is vilifying.  It isn't. It is just pointing out medical facts.  

Edited January 19, 2022 by pogi

[Danzo]

22 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I live in a nation with a robust publicly funded hospital system. In US dollars, it is currently costing us $1,381,652.44 each day to take care of unvaccinated people who are in ICU because of Covid, and an additional $23,575.407.54 per day to take care of unvaccinated people who are in other wards because of Covid.

As you can imagine in a nation with a vaccination rate above 90 per cent, a fair few people are unhappy about this ... and that's before we get to the complete suspension of all 'elective' surgeries in our most affected jurisdictions, including my own, because caring for the unvaccinated is taking all available resources.

Doctrinally, Latter-day Saints should be the last people on the planet to fall for 'I'm only harming myself' nonsense.

90 Percent Vaccinated, yet still 24 million dollars a day in coivd hospitalization costs.  How much does that work out to per patient?

[bsjkki]

15 minutes ago, pogi said:

I will never understand this logic of celebrating natural immunity (a.k.a unprotected "infection") over vaccination, as if it is better.  Shouldn't we consider the risks of acquiring the immunity from either source?  Which source of immunity is safer, and which one killed nearly 1 million Americans, hospitalized and/or debilitated countless millions, and jacked the crap out of the health care system and costed countless billions to treat?

How many people were hospitalized, died, had clots, or suffered debilitating long-term sequelae as a consequence of trying to acquire immunity in this manner - without protection?  They are looking at natural immunity like a safe source of protection, but if the vaccine was responsible for nearly a million deaths and countless millions of hospitalizations and debilitating long-Covid symptoms, but gave better antibodies than natural immunity against infection, would anyone say the vaccine is "better" or "safer"?  Of course not.  It is like drinking poison and saying "what doesn't kill me will make me stronger".  Ok, go drink your poison.  Good luck! 

Let's also not forget that one can acquire natural immunity after vaccination without all the risk of unprotected infection.  One can also get vaccine acquired immunity after natural infection for even more and longer-lasting protection than natural immunity alone.  there is no scenario where a vaccine is not indicated and more protective than natural immunity alone.    There is no contest here.  Vaccines win every time.  We don't need to vilify anyone, but we should educate the public about good health choices and poor health choices.  Sometimes people think that pointing out poor health choices is vilifying.  It isn't. It is just pointing out medical facts.  

The medical fact is natural immunity provided more robust protection against Delta so the people who already had covid should not have been fired from their job or forced to get vaccinated. 
 

*No one should go out and purposely get covid. That would be stupid. 
 

*I feel like you are arguing against a strawman. 
A strawman is a fallacious argument that distorts an opposing stance in order to make it easier to attack. Essentially, the person using the strawman pretends to attack their opponent's stance, while in reality they are actually attacking a distorted version of that stance, which their opponent doesn't necessarily support.

 

[Robert J Anderson]

34 minutes ago, pogi said:

I will never understand this logic of celebrating natural immunity (a.k.a unprotected "infection") over vaccination, as if it is better.  Shouldn't we consider the risks of acquiring the immunity from either source?  Which source of immunity is safer, and which one killed nearly 1 million Americans, hospitalized and/or debilitated countless millions, and jacked the crap out of the health care system and costed countless billions to treat?

How many people were hospitalized, died, had clots, or suffered debilitating long-term sequelae as a consequence of trying to acquire immunity in this manner - without protection?  They are looking at natural immunity like a safe source of protection, but if the vaccine was responsible for nearly a million deaths and countless millions of hospitalizations and debilitating long-Covid symptoms, but gave better antibodies than natural immunity against infection, would anyone say the vaccine is "better" or "safer"?  Of course not.  It is like drinking poison and saying "what doesn't kill me will make me stronger".  Ok, go drink your poison.  Good luck! 

Let's also not forget that one can acquire natural immunity after vaccination without all the risk of unprotected infection.  One can also get vaccine acquired immunity after natural infection for even more and longer-lasting protection than natural immunity alone.  there is no scenario where a vaccine is not indicated and more protective than natural immunity alone.    There is no contest here.  Vaccines win every time.  We don't need to vilify anyone, but we should educate the public about good health choices and poor health choices.  Sometimes people think that pointing out poor health choices is vilifying.  It isn't. It is just pointing out medical facts.  

I don't know if we can say how much the vaccines protect.  They seem to have gotten progressively worse at doing the job promised as new variants have come on.  I'm vaccinated and still got omicron.  I don't know how much they will do against the next variant seeing how they haven't done that well against omicron.  Perhaps, the next iteration of the vaccine will be better?

[bsjkki]

5 minutes ago, Robert J Anderson said:

I don't know if we can say how much the vaccines protect.  They seem to have gotten progressively worse at doing the job promised as new variants have come on.  I'm vaccinated and still got omicron.  I don't know how much they will do against the next variant seeing how they haven't done that well against omicron.  Perhaps, the next iteration of the vaccine will be better?

And have a much shorter shelf life than anticipated which was a main argument against natural immunity. They didn’t know how long it lasted. They are now suggesting the booster should be given sooner than 6 months because of waning immunity of the vaccine is happening sooner than previously thought.

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

90 Percent Vaccinated, yet still 24 million dollars a day in coivd hospitalization costs.

Ninety per cent of the eligible population, yes. That's 2+ doses in those age 12+, which gives an overall vaccination rate of just under 80 percent.

Quote

How much does that work out to per patient?

For multiple reasons (including that I work for a politician), I have no interest in disclosing my location, but I just checked, and it's less than half of the average cost of an ICU day in America, to give you some sense.

In my subnational jurisdiction, only 1.4 per cent of those age 12+ are now unvaccinated, yet according to figures released last night, this tiny percentage currently accounts for 80 per cent of all Covid patients in our ICUs. Those aren't very good odds for those making that choice.

[T-Shirt]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

I will never understand this logic of celebrating natural immunity (a.k.a unprotected "infection") over vaccination, as if it is better. 

Many had Covid long before the vaccine was available.  Yet these people were ignored by government and treated like garbage if they chose not to be vaccinated.  Many lost jobs.

Edited January 20, 2022 by T-Shirt

[bsjkki]

@RaingirlWhat do you dislike about my post? I would like to know.

[rongo]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

The medical fact is natural immunity provided more robust protection against Delta so the people who already had covid should not have been fired from their job or forced to get vaccinated. 

 

14 minutes ago, T-Shirt said:

Many had Covid long before the vaccine was available.  Yet these people were ignored by government and treated like garbage if they chose not to be vaccinated.  Many lost jobs.

One big irony is that health care workers who refused to be vaccinated (30- 40% of the workforce, by some counts) were fired (many of whom had natural immunity), but hospitals are now allowing Covid positive staff to work because of the shortage caused by the mandate resignations/firings. Some of the staffing stresses are self-inflicted wounds. 

I think that Europe's approach has been more scientific and less agenda-driven. Our Austrian friend marvels that natural immunity isn't factored into the herd immunity calculus. He said our family would be regarded the same as fully vaccinated.