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.
Yep, she finished her residency in June '19. She's smarter than I am, and she knows many multiples more about medicine than I do.
Positive tests/cases have risen in 60 days from ~ 60/day to 120/day but aren't higher than March
Hospitalizations are rising but lower than anytime except the month of June
No remarkable difference in deaths. the 7 day average for deaths is < 1, so the chances that this one young doctor at a smaller hospital is having this scenario as frequently as she implies isn't high, and she provides no ages beyond "young and healthy".
I have no doubt she has been there while a patient dies from Covid. I have doubts about her implied frequency and age of deaths.
What does numbers really have to do with her message?
The take away of her message is that people are regretting their decision and it's too late! And unfortunately she is the one that has the burden of telling them that while knowing what their fate may be. That's a heavy burden to carry!
I know that there are people that are just "numbers" people and can't deal with emotions/feelings very well (I have a couple in my family) but at some point you have to realize how emotionally draining this is for our healthcare providers. They have been in the trenches for over a year while others have been out doing whatever the "%*&$" they want. But yet they are still there (exhausted I'm sure) in our time of need, holding our hands and doing what they can regardless of our "choices".
What does numbers really have to do with her message?
The take away of her message is that people are regretting their decision and it's too late! And unfortunately she is the one that has the burden of telling them that while knowing what their fate may be. That's a heavy burden to carry!
I know that there are people that are just "numbers" people and can't deal with emotions/feelings very well (I have a couple in my family) but at some point you have to realize how emotionally draining this is for our healthcare providers. They have been in the trenches for over a year while others have been out doing whatever the "%*&$" they want. But yet they are still there (exhausted I'm sure) in our time of need, holding our hands and doing what they can regardless of our "choices".
Physician and nurse burnout has already been a very know issue pre-pandemic. If I remember correctly about 20% suffered from depression and had PTSD, and over half considered leaving the profession if it wasn’t for student loans, family and peer pressure.
I can’t imagine what the situation is going to be for these people post pandemic. Honestly think that anyone who worked in ICU and with COVID patients with high mortality rates should be offered free therapy. Or other kind of support to overcome PTSD and related depression, or other mental issues.
and I'm sure positioning it that way would convince a large % of the hesitant.
"These are all the vaccines most people have taken in their lives. When there were adverse effects, here was the %, and they occurred within 10 days of receiving the vaccine. No [or maybe only 1%?] adverse issues occurred a year later. After 6 months, here's what we know"*
I said it a week ago - you catch more flies with honey. Calling these people idiots ain't getting them over to the other side.
*And I have personally paid little attention to VAERS(?) - but it does sound like better reporting/fact-gathering would help assuage some people's concerns about transparency.
So there is nuance to my position on this. I think there are five-ish buckets of vax hesitant folks (at least based on my real life experience).
1. Those who can't because of medical situations (maybe unfair to lump them in here, but still want to account for those who "can't")
2. Those who are hesitant because of our country's legacy of medical abuse against certain demographic cohorts. I have a co-worker who is AA and her and I were discussing the vax. She said she won't be getting it because of stuff like Tuskeegee. "I'll let all you white folks get it and then see how you all do before I dive into it".
3. Those who have religious issues with vaccines. I admit, as a none religious person, I have a hard time reconciling the idea that god granted us cognitive abilities to shape and mold the world around us; including the practice of medicine to deal with any number of afflictions....but then using religion as a reason to not utilize medicine. But I admit it really isn't my place to question someone's faith.
4. Those who, in good faith, have legit questions. To me this is the group that deserves the "catch em with honey" approach. Assuming they are open to honest fact and evidence based discussion, yes that approach would hopefully work.
5. Then there are those who I call the "bad faith, for meeeeeee, poop throwers". They have no real facts to back up their position. They have no self awareness to see the position they are taking runs counter to all of our (and their) interests in getting back to "normal" and yet can't even see that they will be the reason this all falls apart. Made up stats garnered from a drunk uncle on Facebook, pointing to 1 in a million AEs as reasons...while ignoring the simple fact that one in a million is far less than the efficacy and the "no AE bucket" of what they are railing against. They see any form of "advocacy" as being put upon by egg head doctors, the government or any other boogieman they can latch onto.
Group 1 and 2 have my sympathies. Group 3 leaves me confused, but I realize the personal nature of faith. Group 4 I am hopeful to them flipping the script.
Group 5 can lick my taint and will get nothing but scorn, admonishment and ridicule from this reader. After the 20 months we have just lived through and their constant contrarian approach to this.....I firmly they believe they should be looked at and laughed at and scarlet lettered for the rest of their natural lives. At the very least, when the going got tough, they wilted into a sad sack of selfish wet blankets and we (I) will never forget it...especially if they cripple our chances at finding normal again. These people are gone. Mentally trapped in a made up "sci fi thriller" novel they think reality is.
On the topic of “long term risks†(as a reason for hesitancy) the doc said “vaccines aren’t like drugs, where long term side effects can take a long time to manifest (like organ damage from sustained use of a a drug). Vaccine side effects would be seen rather quickly based on what vaccines are, and we aren’t seeing thatâ€. I mean we don’t hear any stories about the vaccines we all mostly get throughout our lives causing problems later in our lives (unless you’re Jenny McCarthy)
The mRNA vaccines, and I use that term loosely, are not like any other past vaccine in how they work once inside the body. No one knows whether or not long term health risks will exist...its way too soon and only time will reveal those answers. Until then, doctors who make such bold claims about no long term side affect risks are either just speculating or they really have no clue.
That is always your answer when pressed for evidence "you would not believe it". You made the statement, you post the proof or just admit that you are making baseless claims and fear mongering.
That's like asking for evidence that the sun is shining. You can easily find that out for yourself but you are just too afraid of what you might see when looking out the window and want someone else to do it for you.
The mRNA vaccines, and I use that term loosely, are not like any other past vaccine in how they work once inside the body.
Which term do you use loosely? Vaccine? You and I have been over this before (back in May, see link below).
You are still caught up in this ill informed talking point (yes I have seen it on other boards I go to) that these mRNA vaccines aren't vaccines because of the manner in which they work (i.e. mRNA teaches our cells to make a protein vs historically vaccines injected you with inactive versions of the pathogen).
You are missing the point, still it seems, that vaccines are not defined by the mechanisms of their function but rather the end result of their use.
No one knows whether or not long term health risks will exist...its way too soon and only time will reveal those answers. Until then, doctors who make such bold claims about no long term side affect risks are either just speculating or they really have no clue.
So the mRNA construct is decades old, and has been used in cancer treatments. Yes it's "new" because this is the first vaccine to use it. Never mind the fact the mRNA that is injected into a person when they get this vaccine is degraded and gone within a day or two. mRNA doesn't change someone's DNA. DNA is in the nucleus of our cells. mRNA works in the cytoplasm of the cells. This is really HS level biology stuff. mRNA is like a fax of instructions to the cells to create X (in this case a spike protein) and then the fax is thrown away.
But more bewildering, is that you keep glossing over a key point. Side effects from vaccines are seen shortly after they are given, not years later. Please, find me data on AEs to any of the number of vaccines that are used by millions of people a year for the last ~100 years.
Now I am not denying that there have been AEs from this vaccine. There have been the following
2. Blood clots. Using some data from the EU on this (https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/as...lots-low-blood) - "62 cases of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis and 24 cases of splanchnic vein thrombosis reported in the EU drug safety database (EudraVigilance) as of 22 March 2021, 18 of which were fatal.1 The cases came mainly from spontaneous reporting systems of the EEA and the UK, where around 25 million people had received the vaccine."
So were talking 62 cases out of 25M people vaccinated (at the time of this report). That is a .000248% rate of occurrence.
So again, if you are worried about something that has a .00294%, .000248% or .0008% chance of happening, then you literally must never leave your house. Your risk of dying from Heart Disease, Cancer, COPD, suicide, Opioid OD, falling down, car accident, gun shot, getting hit by a car, crashing a motorcycle, drowning, in a fire/from smoke, choking, a bicycle accident, sun stroke, accidentally getting shot, Electrocution, radiation, extreme temperatures, and pressure, a sharp object, a cataclysmic storm, insect stings, a hot surface, dog attack, lightning strike, train crash and plane crash are in some cases, quite literally thousands of times more likely (you are 369 times more likely to die from an Opioid OD than you are to get any of the AEs mentioned above)
I will say this. If, a year ago, I was chastised by some for my position on masks ("living in fear!!!!") because they were only 65% effective.....what does that it make a person who isn't doing something because there are .00294% chance / a .000248% / or a .0008% chance one of the three above happens? People literally live their lives without the fear of getting killed by lightning....yet that is just as likely as the above.
The mRNA vaccines, and I use that term loosely, are not like any other past vaccine in how they work once inside the body. No one knows whether or not long term health risks will exist...its way too soon and only time will reveal those answers. Until then, doctors who make such bold claims about no long term side affect risks are either just speculating or they really have no clue.
You repeatedly spout the same willfull ignorance over and over again, despite many people trying to politely correct your misconceptions. Why not just hang out on facebook and let Mark Zuckerberg ring his cash register each time you get someone to respond to one of your misinformational rants. Maybe you can get a cut of the revenue?
Which term do you use loosely? Vaccine? You and I have been over this before (back in May, see link below).
You are still caught up in this ill informed talking point (yes I have seen it on other boards I go to) that these mRNA vaccines aren't vaccines because of the manner in which they work (i.e. mRNA teaches our cells to make a protein vs historically vaccines injected you with inactive versions of the pathogen).
You are missing the point, still it seems, that vaccines are not defined by the mechanisms of their function but rather the end result of their use.
So the mRNA construct is decades old, and has been used in cancer treatments. Yes it's "new" because this is the first vaccine to use it. Never mind the fact the mRNA that is injected into a person when they get this vaccine is degraded and gone within a day or two. mRNA doesn't change someone's DNA. DNA is in the nucleus of our cells. mRNA works in the cytoplasm of the cells. This is really HS level biology stuff. mRNA is like a fax of instructions to the cells to create X (in this case a spike protein) and then the fax is thrown away.
But more bewildering, is that you keep glossing over a key point. Side effects from vaccines are seen shortly after they are given, not years later. Please, find me data on AEs to any of the number of vaccines that are used by millions of people a year for the last ~100 years.
Now I am not denying that there have been AEs from this vaccine. There have been the following
2. Blood clots. Using some data from the EU on this (https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/as...lots-low-blood) - "62 cases of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis and 24 cases of splanchnic vein thrombosis reported in the EU drug safety database (EudraVigilance) as of 22 March 2021, 18 of which were fatal.1 The cases came mainly from spontaneous reporting systems of the EEA and the UK, where around 25 million people had received the vaccine."
So were talking 62 cases out of 25M people vaccinated (at the time of this report). That is a .000248% rate of occurrence.
So again, if you are worried about something that has a .00294%, .000248% or .0008% chance of happening, then you literally must never leave your house. Your risk of dying from Heart Disease, Cancer, COPD, suicide, Opioid OD, falling down, car accident, gun shot, getting hit by a car, crashing a motorcycle, drowning, in a fire/from smoke, choking, a bicycle accident, sun stroke, accidentally getting shot, Electrocution, radiation, extreme temperatures, and pressure, a sharp object, a cataclysmic storm, insect stings, a hot surface, dog attack, lightning strike, train crash and plane crash are in some cases, quite literally thousands of times more likely (you are 369 times more likely to die from an Opioid OD than you are to get any of the AEs mentioned above)
I will say this. If, a year ago, I was chastised by some for my position on masks ("living in fear!!!!") because they were only 65% effective.....what does that it make a person who isn't doing something because there are .00294% chance / a .000248% / or a .0008% chance one of the three above happens? People literally live their lives without the fear of getting killed by lightning....yet that is just as likely as the above.
Can I question the percentages for the item in bold? Myocarditis/pericarditis is impacting young males. Your number .00294% is that out of all people vaccinate or just adolescent males?
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.
