Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's obvious confusion because it's a dynamic situation. People are trying to learn the dynamics of the immunology of COVID. I don't blame anyone for getting confused. I personally view the situation as one that gets every bit of protection that one can get until the next biggest mitigation step comes along during times of increasing infection rates. Others might see it as not being enough or worth the justification. I can understand that to a certain extent.
The Israel study cited showed beneficial short-time efficacy. The WHO is concerned with a world strategy of getting people vaccinated who have never been vaccinated. That's their priority. It's about the strategic distribution of the vaccine of where should one go with limited vaccines. Fourth dose vs giving the first dose? I know where they are coming from. Not that great of effect with the 4th and so give it to somebody for the first instead. The optimal timing of the boosters is still being worked out. Unfortunately, it will take time to figure it out.
Just to be clear here on what the Irarali study showed
"CONCLUSIONS
Rates of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe Covid-19 were lower after a fourth dose of BNT162b2 vaccine than after only three doses. Protection against confirmed infection appeared short-lived, whereas protection against severe illness did not wane during the study period."
I don't know what kind of doctor they are that would tell their elderly parents not to vaccinate with boosters because of the possibility of "long-term" side effects. Boosters have been given for many other vaccines and we have a yearly flu vaccine. Long term effects would be of concern to young people, not the elderly who only have limited years to live. There are immediate health issues that if clinical studies show a declined efficacy of the current status of the cohort as being susceptible to infection then it should be addressed and not ignored. There's no informed decision-making. Telling elderly parents to worry about what will happen in 20 years? That's not realistic.
I would also ask if that same doctor recommends flu vaccines every year to his elderly parents and if he has the same concerns about long-term side effects.
Normally doctors don't treat family members for reasons like this. They aren't even supposed to treat themselves. There's many reasons for this.
I wonder what the position of the doctor in charge of the parents would say. What a doctor tells his parents, one way or another, is in no way the gold standard that anyone should go by. There's too many variables.
I understand what you are saying, but I think you missed my point. Opinion on the vaccines is very divided even amongst people in the medical profession. A lot of people are against the vaccines for whatever reasons, and you are not going to change their minds on this.
Personally, I thought it made more sense to have both shots, and then I was open to having a booster. I am not sure I am open to having a second booster, though, not after what I have seen. I know plenty of older folks like myself who do not want ANY shots and will not get them. No amount of arguing is going to change their minds. You can advocate for all of the shots as much as you like, but a lot of people will remain unconvinced. You have to accept that because you cannot change it. As I said, though, as for me, I will not rush to get a second booster shot.
ETA: I still feel the vaccines were developed MUCH too quickly, and there could be all sorts of problems that stem from them in years to come. Consider this. For decades I took an Rx decongestant with an antibiotic every time I developed a sinus infection, which was pretty often whilst I lived in one part of the country that had a lot air pollution and allergens. I cannot recall the name of the drug, but some years ago now, they took it off the market. They said it could cause heart problems and heart attacks. Now, the drug had been on the market at least 60 years by then. I was stunned that it took SIXTY YEARS for them to figure out that the drug had negative implications for heart problems. This vaccine, on the other hand, has only been around what about 2 years now? Yet, so many people are SURE that it is fine. Well, I am not convinced of this, and my memory of that decongestant that was taken off the market after 60 years proves to me that they do not find out what negative effects any sort of drug might have on people until years later.
Anyway, that is my personal opinion. Some will agree and some will not agree. C'est la vie.
Last edited by PhinneyWalker; 06-07-2022 at 01:41 PM..
I understand what you are saying, but I think you missed my point. Opinion on the vaccines is very divided even amongst people in the medical profession. A lot of people are against the vaccines for whatever reasons, and you are not going to change their mind on this.
Opinion on the vaccines is not divided among physicians. My son is a physician and my wife is a CRNP. All the physicians they work with are strongly in favor of the Covid vaccines. I've also seen my PCP, a urologist, a cardiologist, and two ENTs recently and they all highly recommended the vaccine.
Last edited by villageidiot1; 06-07-2022 at 01:57 PM..
Fine. I accept your testimony. Accept mine. I have seen the opposite of what you have seen. Opinion is divided, and I have spoken to more than enough people in all walks of life to convince me of this fact.
I understand what you are saying, but I think you missed my point. Opinion on the vaccines is very divided even amongst people in the medical profession. A lot of people are against the vaccines for whatever reasons, and you are not going to change their minds on this.
Anyway, that is my personal opinion. Some will agree and some will not agree. C'est la vie.
I saw your implied point that the medical opinion is divided on the vaccines. I took it to mean that they are against any vaccine. I'm afraid I have to disagree that the medical community is divided. There are very few dissenters. The overwhelming consensus is to give the vaccines. There is some discussion about the timing of the vaccines which is where we are at.
I saw your implied point that the medical opinion is divided on the vaccines. I took it to mean that they are against any vaccine. I'm afraid I have to disagree that the medical community is divided. There are very few dissenters. The overwhelming consensus is to give the vaccines. There is some discussion about the timing of the vaccines which is where we are at.
We will just have to disagree with that.
I am happy to agree with you about the medical community being a solid united block on this point as soon as you can show me you have polled everyone in the medical community and they all agree. What I said is that there are many people, some of them in the medical community, who are not in favour of everyone taking the vaccine. Yes, we will have to agree to disagree.
I hope everyone will give some thought as to why they developed these vaccines so quickly, and why some people are claiming the vaccines are truly safe in both the short and the long terms. Think of what has been at stake economically from day one. Big, powerful industries such as the airline industry and tourism industry worldwide to name but two were brought to their knees by Covid. Governments and big monied interests have excellent vested reasons for telling all the plebs that these vaccines are necessary and safe and everyone should have the shots and an undetermined number of boosters to follow. I certainly would have supported the shots for elderly people, especially those who lived in close quarters and were the first to be decimated by Covid, but does it necessarily follow that the vaccines are mandatory for everyone and totally safe in both the short and long terms? I am not convinced of the latter. I have been a witness to too much history not to know that vested interests say whatever is in their best interest even if it conflicts with the rest of humankind. What happened with the plastics industry since the 1970s and 1980s alone underscores that point.
Last edited by PhinneyWalker; 06-07-2022 at 02:44 PM..
I am happy to agree with you about the medical community being a solid united block on this point as soon as you can show me you have polled everyone in the medical community and they all agree. What I said is that there are many people, some of them in the medical community, who are not in favour of everyone taking the vaccine. Yes, we will have to agree to disagree.
For the sake of brevity and since this link has all the organizations on one link.
"Statement of Strong Medical Consensus for Vaccination of Pregnant Individuals Against COVID-19
Last updated: September 14, 2021
The following is a joint statement between the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists | American Academy of Family Physicians | American Academy of PAs | American Academy of Pediatrics | American Association of Nurse Practitioners | American College of Nurse-Midwives | American College of Osteopathic Obstetricians & Gynecologists | American College of Physicians | American Pharmacists Association | Association of Immunization Managers | Association of State and Territorial Health Officials | Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses | Infectious Diseases Society of America | Infectious Diseases Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology | National Association of Chain Drug Stores | National Association of County & City Health Officials | National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health | National Foundation for Infectious Diseases | National Hispanic Medical Association | North American Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology | Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine | Society of OB/GYN Hospitalists | Vaccinate Your Family
Also signed by: the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, the Association of PAs in Obstetrics & Gynecology, the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists."
I would say there is pretty much a consensus on behalf of the medical profession for people getting vaccinated. Again timing because it is still fresh and studies are still ongoing there can be some confusion.
One really has to go out of their way to find a doctor who doesn't recommend the vaccine. Are they out there? Sure but you really have to worry about their medical competency and other bizarre beliefs. The vaccine is out and we know the efficacy in preventing severe disease and deaths.
I understand what you are saying, but I think you missed my point. Opinion on the vaccines is very divided even amongst people in the medical profession. ...
Divided implies something like a 50/50 split, and that's not even remotely close to being true. They're overwhelmingly in favor of getting vaccinated.
I've read that many doctors aren't convinced of the necessity for second booster, which is more in line with the topic of this thread.
I have no desire to bicker about "consensus" or the exact "percentages" of divided opinion on the matter. My point is that I know plenty of people, some of them in the medical profession, who are not in favour of the vaccines. I know many people who refuse to take the vaccines period. Those folks have made up their minds just as you have made up your minds. They are not going to change your minds, and you are not going to change their minds. That really is all I have to say. Accept it or not, but I am not going to argue about it. Life is too short, and I have better things to do.
Boosted people are having a higher rate of infection right now than non boosted, and no one is exactly sure why this is the case.
Yes, a personal risk assessment is a good idea. If/when hospitalization rates for "fully vaccinated" increase in your cohort then it's time for another booster, IMO.
Source?????????????????????????
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
