Imprison anyone who refuses the vax!

[oggsmash]

I'm not too concerned about how many booster shots people will need to take. If anything, the new tech could even help fight off cancerous cells or whatever they program into it. Enough people already took it to deem it safe. I'm just curious on why and how long it will take for full approval.

   My wife works in clinical trial research... what you say about enough people is simply not how safety is determined.   There has been no study on long term effects.   It could be safe (as safe as vaccines can be) or it could have long term issues.  Seems we are now getting some odd signals from media and powers that be that the vaccinated can act as super spreaders.   Strange that people vaccinated for polio are never, ever spreading it around.

You know the vaccine supposedly doesn't contain the actual virus, right? I'm no expert in the way these new vax are manufactured but unlike Covid, the odds of serious complications are at the bare minimum. Like, you really gotta hit the unlucky lottery. Still, your body your choice. Do what you feel comfortable with. The fact 50% of the nation is already vaccinated aught speak for itself.

  Oh it speaks for itself.   I think you have completely missed understanding what I said as well.

[Ratman_tf]

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/coronavirus-antibodies-detected-us-wild-deer-180978366/

"Researchers are concerned with infections occurring in the wild because of the virus's ability to mutate and jump from one species to another, which could create a reservoir for the virus to mutate and infect humans, the New York Times reports."

[Shasarak]

At least that answers my question from earlier. You've decided what you believe, and you're looking for anything to discredit anyone who says anything that contradicts your preexisting beliefs, even if your objections make no sense whatsoever.

Pat you have met people before, right?

[Zelen]

One of the more concerning things that I've started hearing about is that at least some hospitals in California are instructing staff to refuse to provide appropriate care for unvaccinated patients. A variety of interventions such as vitamins C&D, monoclonal antibodies, et al, can assist patients who are already infected & suffering severe symptoms. Such a policy would of course be highly relevant to contextualizing data about hospitalizations, ICU & deaths, particularly given that the overall numbers we're now seeing are so small.

For example, Oregon misclassified 5 deaths among fully vaccinated people as belonging to "unvaccinated" during the past month, which was a doubling in the number of vaccinated deaths, and ~18% of the total monthly figure. There is a very perverse set of incentives at play such that pressure being applied to provide a lower standard of care to even a few patients makes a big difference in the media-driven fear machine.

[GriswaldTerrastone]

Interesting news story- someone (vaccinated) went to a party, a total of fourteen people- all vaccinated, up-to-date, etc.

Eleven of those people ended up with Covid-19. Do the math.

[Zelen]

Interesting news story- someone (vaccinated) went to a party, a total of fourteen people- all vaccinated, up-to-date, etc.

Eleven of those people ended up with Covid-19. Do the math.

I've heard of this one, but it's a bit old if this is the AZ party with healthcare workers. More pertinent was the cruise ship with all vaccinated staff & passengers suffering an outbreak.

Zooming out a bit further, the focus on "infections" generally is pointless. The immune system isn't purposed to keep you from ever having pathogens in your body. The media likes this metric since it justifies endless fear-porn, but we've seen a substantial decoupling of "infections" from deaths over the past year. It'd be nice if we could get more sober analysis

Interestingly enough, the decoupling itself isn't solely (as commonly suggested) due to prevalence of vaccines since the decoupling effect occurred before widespread vaccination (>10% in some cases). It's not really clear what the mechanisms at play are, although we can guess that it's a mixture of survivorship, prior infection, and seasonal effects.

[HappyDaze]

One of the more concerning things that I've started hearing about is that at least some hospitals in California are instructing staff to refuse to provide appropriate care for unvaccinated patients. A variety of interventions such as vitamins C&D, monoclonal antibodies, et al, can assist patients who are already infected & suffering severe symptoms. Such a policy would of course be highly relevant to contextualizing data about hospitalizations, ICU & deaths, particularly given that the overall numbers we're now seeing are so small.

For example, Oregon misclassified 5 deaths among fully vaccinated people as belonging to "unvaccinated" during the past month, which was a doubling in the number of vaccinated deaths, and ~18% of the total monthly figure. There is a very perverse set of incentives at play such that pressure being applied to provide a lower standard of care to even a few patients makes a big difference in the media-driven fear machine.

Can you provide a reliable source on your "California doctors & nurses instructed to withhold care for unvaccinated" rumor, or are you just talking out of your ass?

[GeekyBugle]

One of the more concerning things that I've started hearing about is that at least some hospitals in California are instructing staff to refuse to provide appropriate care for unvaccinated patients. A variety of interventions such as vitamins C&D, monoclonal antibodies, et al, can assist patients who are already infected & suffering severe symptoms. Such a policy would of course be highly relevant to contextualizing data about hospitalizations, ICU & deaths, particularly given that the overall numbers we're now seeing are so small.

For example, Oregon misclassified 5 deaths among fully vaccinated people as belonging to "unvaccinated" during the past month, which was a doubling in the number of vaccinated deaths, and ~18% of the total monthly figure. There is a very perverse set of incentives at play such that pressure being applied to provide a lower standard of care to even a few patients makes a big difference in the media-driven fear machine.

Can you provide a reliable source on your "California doctors & nurses instructed to withhold care for unvaccinated" rumor, or are you just talking out of your ass?

Well, you see, he could but you haven't the security clearance, so like with your BS unsubstantiated claims you'll just have to trust him.

[Ghostmaker]

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/global-covid-19/shielding-approach-humanitarian.html

What the FUCK.

"What is the Shielding Approach?
The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease ("high-risk") and the general population ("low-risk"). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or "green zones" established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.

Current evidence indicates that older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions are at higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19. In most humanitarian settings, older population groups make up a small percentage of the total population. For this reason, the shielding approach suggests physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population to prioritize the use of the limited available resources and avoid implementing long-term containment measures among the general population.

In theory, shielding may serve its objective to protect high-risk populations from disease and death. However, implementation of the approach necessitates strict adherence to protocol. Inadvertent introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission among the most vulnerable populations the approach is trying to protect.

A summary of the shielding approach described by Favas is shown in Table 1. See Guidance for the prevention of COVID-19 infections among high-risk individuals in low-resource, displaced and camp and camp-like settings, for full details."

What the fuck is this? Are we going to relitigate Korematsu and the Japanese internment all over again, except with 'vulnerable persons'?

[GeekyBugle]

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/global-covid-19/shielding-approach-humanitarian.html

What the FUCK.

"What is the Shielding Approach?
The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease ("high-risk") and the general population ("low-risk"). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or "green zones" established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting. They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.

Current evidence indicates that older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions are at higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19. In most humanitarian settings, older population groups make up a small percentage of the total population. For this reason, the shielding approach suggests physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population to prioritize the use of the limited available resources and avoid implementing long-term containment measures among the general population.

In theory, shielding may serve its objective to protect high-risk populations from disease and death. However, implementation of the approach necessitates strict adherence to protocol. Inadvertent introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission among the most vulnerable populations the approach is trying to protect.

A summary of the shielding approach described by Favas is shown in Table 1. See Guidance for the prevention of COVID-19 infections among high-risk individuals in low-resource, displaced and camp and camp-like settings, for full details."

What the fuck is this? Are we going to relitigate Korematsu and the Japanese internment all over again, except with 'vulnerable persons'?

Wait, are they really saying this approach is HUMANITARIAN?

Fucking concentration camps are now humanitarian?

Dude the USA is seriously fucked if assholes in the government can publish this and not get summarily fired and barred from ever working in the government or running for office.

[Pat]

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/global-covid-19/shielding-approach-humanitarian.html

What the FUCK.

"What is the Shielding Approach?

The general theory is quite reasonable. One of the biggest factors in different death rates between different states and nations is whether covid-19 spread unchecked among nursing homes, or whether they managed to keep it out. Especially since the high risk population is so easily identifiable -- primarily the elderly, but secondarily the obese -- why not try to protect them?

I was arguing more than a year ago that we should be focusing on things like doubling the pay of nursing home staff in exchange for staying at work for weeks at a stretch, and to have some kind of isolation or disinfection procedure for new arrivals, including supplies. The idea is to limit the chance for outside sources to infect the protected population, instead of having people and supplies coming and going every day. The operational considerations section in the CDC document is similar in concept.

But the point I was making was to do do that, and let everyone else, from business to schools, go about their normal business. No general lockdowns, no mask mandates, none of that. The basic idea is to quarantine the people at risk and protect them from the general population, instead of the crazy backwards approach of quarantining the whole population to protect the smaller high risk groups.

One side effect is the disease would spread among those who were most likely to survive, i.e. the general population, allowing the development of herd immunity, and eventually allowing the restrictions on the high risk groups to be taken down.

But we didn't follow that path. Instead, there were massive lockdowns and other restrictions on the general population, including low risk groups like most workers and schoolchildren. This slowed transmission, and slowed the development of herd immunity. And rather than protecting the most at risk, a number of countries (and 5 states) moved sick patients from hospitals into nursing homes, out of a largely unwarranted concern that the hospitals systems would soon be overwhelmed. This caused covid-19 to spread among the groups we should have been protecting, and ended up killing a lot of people. Public health completely failed to protect the most vulnerable.

But I think it's important to note that any such restrictions should be voluntary. Even if coercion can be justified in keeping the sick away from the general population, it can't be justified when it comes to people who aren't sick but are simply at higher risk. And it should have been short-term, because it's not a viable long-term strategy. More than 18 months in, the dreadful social, psychological, and even physical effects of isolating people from their loved ones, or even normal human contact, is more apparent than ever.

The camps in the document you're referencing sound as creepy as hell, but that's based on what's not said, rather than what is said. Are they going to force people into these camps? I can't tell. They don't even mention consent, or any of the obvious considerations like messaging or the role of law enforcement. The whole document seems very poorly developed. They're checking some of the usual boxes that appear in every disaster plan, but it doesn't gel into something coherent. The overarching goal or plan is unclear, and a lot of basic considerations aren't even mentioned.

Honestly, the document should have never been published. It's a mess.

[FelixGamingX1]

What the FUCK.

"What is the Shielding Approach?

The general theory is quite reasonable.

For a Resident Evil game, yes. Another reason why people need to stop treating Covid as the mere cold. If you go on YouTube, you'll see healthy young survivors begging people to take the vax, wear masks, etc. End of the day ain't nobody making fun of mask wearers, and if they do, who cares!? I've got a sweet American flag gaiter that supposedly only protects me 35% and that's fine for me. This pandemic is being driven by reckless human behavior! The virus needs a host, don't be the host = end of pandemic.

[oggsmash]

What the FUCK.

"What is the Shielding Approach?

The general theory is quite reasonable.

For a Resident Evil game, yes. Another reason why people need to stop treating Covid as the mere cold. If you go on YouTube, you'll see healthy young survivors begging people to take the vax, wear masks, etc. End of the day ain't nobody making fun of mask wearers, and if they do, who cares!? I've got a sweet American flag gaiter that supposedly only protects me 35% and that's fine for me. This pandemic is being driven by reckless human behavior! The virus needs a host, don't be the host = end of pandemic.

   I think most treat it as if it were the flu, and since the flu is more deadly to people under 25, that seem appropriate with regard to whether kids in school should be mandated wearing a mask.  Strange we NEVER cared enough about the health of kids to make everyone wear masks during flu season, but now we are extremely concerned and kids must mask up to attend school.   if people want to be actually protected out in the world, wear a respirator or a gas mask.  otherwise you are just jerking off.

[Zelen]

Can you provide a reliable source on your "California doctors & nurses instructed to withhold care for unvaccinated" rumor, or are you just talking out of your ass?

I wasn't trying to present that as anything more than a rumor, but it's definitely something I will keep an eye on. It squares pretty readily with testimonial from an associate of mine as a nurse in California, ongoing attempts to hype vaccination & drive up resentment towards unvaccinated folks.

Even if true, I doubt there's an official memo reading: "NOTICE of CRIMINAL INTENT," so it comes down to a he-said, she-said anyway.

Dude the USA is seriously fucked if assholes in the government can publish this and not get summarily fired and barred from ever working in the government or running for office.

Yes we are. Canada already has camps set up, FWIW, complete with cheerful "VAX MAKES YOU FREE" signage on the fences.

[Ratman_tf]

What the FUCK.

"What is the Shielding Approach?

The general theory is quite reasonable.

For a Resident Evil game, yes. Another reason why people need to stop treating Covid as the mere cold. If you go on YouTube, you'll see healthy young survivors begging people to take the vax, wear masks, etc. End of the day ain't nobody making fun of mask wearers, and if they do, who cares!? I've got a sweet American flag gaiter that supposedly only protects me 35% and that's fine for me. This pandemic is being driven by reckless human behavior! The virus needs a host, don't be the host = end of pandemic.

How do you "not be a host"? Become a robot person?

The party line now is that vaccines only prevent harm, they do not prevent spread. And masking does not protect you, it's supposed to protect others.
Jesus, at least get the propoganda straight!

https://www.rollcall.com/2021/07/30/cdc-report-shows-vaccinated-people-can-spread-covid-19/

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks?gclid=Cj0KCQjw6s2IBhCnARIsAP8RfAiLZJ40pjTsysfhapHeMhhTUbTuhKfuIPFkZWKZiLO_BSRx0-Y7wWoaAh_LEALw_wcB