quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
^^^^ Mike Rowe recently addressed this very topic by responding to some Nancy who took offense to Mike's answer to a question from another fan's question regarding vaccines and Mike's opinion on them. Mike is measure and brilliant as always.

https://www.facebook.com/TheRe...396383570469/?type=3

Mike Rowe is an American treasure in my opinion. And the positions he states here are almost exactly my own. I believe that the politization of the pandemic has led to (or more correctly) confirmed serious distrust in our institutions. I especially love the line about what Biden should have said supporting Trump's efforts with Operation Warp Speed in creating a safe and effective vaccine. "If Biden really wanted to champion vaccines in the Fall of 2020, he could have said, “My fellow Americans, I am praying that President Trump succeeds in his efforts to create a safe and effective vaccine in record time. I fully support his efforts to do so, and I am personally committed to doing all I can fight this disease, no matter what it means for my own future in politics.”" He of course didn't, nor did Kamala Harris, and no one here on this board is remotely surprised that they acted like the supremely self-interested politicians they are.

Balze Halze - thanks so much for posting that.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
Influenza has specific target in mind when the yearly formula is created; where it falls flat is newer strains, as most people are aware. It does do a very good job when the target virus is encountered. It seems with Covid however, that the vaccines just aren’t that effective- certainly nowhere near the stellar 95%+ numbers that were touted initially. If it at least held sway over the parent virus for a similar amount of time as, say, influenza, people that are skeptical might be a bit less so. I am inclined to disagree that it is acceptable for a vaccine to stop being effective after 5 short months. I do not believe a “season” has anything to do with it. I’m more inclined to think that coronavirus’s do not lend themselves by their very nature to vaccine success. If they did, the common cold might no longer be so common.

What I see and hear when bumbling Joe or that fraud Fauci bark about masks and vaccine boosters is a never ending series of multi year shots… at least fir those willing to keep trusting something that arguably is having minimal success. When Iceland and Israel, countries that don’t answer to the MSM or the US government report unusually high numbers of “breakthrough@ cases (personally I think that is a stupid descriptor- they should just call them what they are- vaccine failures) I have less trust than ever for those that cavort around massless at Obama birthday parties and Pelosi fundraisers. Those clowns just point out that the obvious- that they believe the general population is stupid and gullible.

gearhounds, this is a very fair critique of the vaccines, and I agree that coronaviruses rates of mutation/change make them very difficulty and possibly even impossible to make vaccines that will have years long protections against. Again, a very fair critique. However, in my experience I am not seeing the same level of breakthrough cases or failures as has been reported in Israel. I do admit that my experience is slanted (scientifically, we would say biased, but that is of course a pejorative term in common use now) by the fact that I work in an Emergency Department. I don't see people who get the vaccine and get sick with no or minimal symptoms. I only see the ones who think they may need to be in the hospital (and of course those with no where else to go). Additionally, I suspect that Israel is between 1 and 2 months ahead of us in terms of when segments of the population got vaccinated (kind of a canary in the coal mine scenario, if you know what I mean). Additionally, Israel is doing so much more testing at the population level than we are, and I think their research will be key to answering a lot of the questions I have about the vaccines. I wish were were testing large portions of the population every day, and logging their vaccine status, when and which vaccine they received, and any symptoms they are having at the time. I have not seen any reports that the CDC is pursuing anything like that. Testing only when you develop symptoms leaves out such a great deal of the questions we have about this infection and does not help to provide data for people to make a more informed choice. The previous post quotes Mike Rowe saying “At this point, I’m afraid the government has but one course of sensible action - get the FDA on board, stat, and then, provide an honest, daily breakdown of just how quickly the virus is spreading among the unvaccinated, versus the vaccinated. No more threats, no more judgments, no more politics, no more celebrity-driven PSA’s, no more ham-fisted attempts at public shaming. Just a steady flow of verifiable data that definitively proves that the vast, undeniable, overwhelming majority of people who get this disease are unvaccinated.” Of course, we are all aware of how sensible the government is.

It honestly may be that Israel finds that vaccinated people still get Covid, and also that they may be able to spread it widely to others. But my experience is showing that vaccinated people don't get the disease badly enough to need a hospital, the unvaccinated do, and in a large enough number that they are causing serious strain on the health care system as a whole. If Israel's data does show that to be the case, and my personal experience is also correct, is that an argument against vaccination or for it?

quote:

Originally posted by barndg00:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
^^^^ Mike Rowe recently addressed this very topic by responding to some Nancy who took offense to Mike's answer to a question from another fan's question regarding vaccines and Mike's opinion on them. Mike is measure and brilliant as always.

https://www.facebook.com/TheRe...396383570469/?type=3

Mike Rowe is an American treasure in my opinion. ....

Mike Rowe is awesome. He aligns with me in so many ways. The debate he was having, he subtly destroyed his opponent, especially in the last few exchanges.

Coincidentally I feel the same as him. I did take the shot. I considered many factors and waited for the first 100 million US guinea pigs to test it out. Never ever could I consider asking anyone to take not only an experimental medicine or one that's clearly not all that effective. To mandate it is absolutely criminal.

Why is the idea of personal freedom now taboo?

I'm not taking either side of this discussion.

I had Covid and spent 11 days in the hospital, was home for a week and started getting rapid heart beats. That put me back in the hospital for 3 days because it was, as I was told by multiple doctors, a side effect of Covid was AFIB. They got me back in sinus rhythm, the AFIB has not returned, I am on meds for that. AFIB is some scary and deadly stuff.

Having said all that, I'm asking WHY the general population can't get real N95 masks? All I've seen for sale for the last 18 months or so is those worthless surgical type cheap paper flimsy masks. You know the ones I'm talking about.

So, why are there no real N95 masks being pumped out for the general population?

If you want to get past this COVID fiasco situation, where are the N95 masks?

I would not mind wearing a real N95 mask if it would help to control COVID, but all we see are these cheap crappy ineffective paper masks. Worthless crap.

Thanks for letting me pop in to this thread, and thanks to Para for keeping things here under control. And thanks to Barndog for his thoughts.
.

OKCGene, I'm very glad you recovered. N95 masks are available, but not cheap. Quick search on Amazon yielded this.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=3m+...b_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_1_3

I trust 3M, Kimberly Clark, and Halyard Fluidshield, the last two being what are available in my hospital. I don't trust the KN95 stuff from China and elsewhere (as I understand it, it is a subtly different standard, with quality control and consistency being part of it, perhaps someone with more knowledge than I could weigh in on that). This one https://www.amazon.com/Kimberl...d_i=B08NVDFB3R&psc=1 is what I use at work. Fit matters with these though, hence why they come in different sizes. There is a whole fit testing procedure that OSHA mandates we go through yearly, but basically, if you don't feel air going out at the edges when you exhale, and it sucks in a bit when you inhale, you should be good. Beards of course negate the protection they provide as air passes by then.

quote:

I think it is imperative that they continue with in-person learning. I believe that we will see schools that are not wearing masks have higher levels of kids becoming infected and high levels of kids/teachers needing to quarantine,

This is the same nonsense that our local school board spewed when mandating masks for this school year. All of the surrounding districts are masks optional.

Why do I say it's nonsense?

Last year they quarantined 1,327 students and staff due to "close contact exposure". Of those 1,327 people quarantined for 10 to 14 days, they can't cite a single one that later tested positive, and where that was contact traced back to school contact. Zero.

In person learning is being eliminated by sending healthy people home, and that makes no logical sense.

But it gets even better. Now we have "modified" rules that go even further to twist all connections to reality. I can not fathom how all of these people with all of these degrees can be so absent from what they can see with their own two eyes.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:

Why is the idea of personal freedom now taboo?

Because with personal freedom comes independent thinking. If you think for yourself, you aren’t scared of the sniffles. If you aren’t scared of the sniffles, you can’t be convinced to give up your Rights and liberty.

This isn’t the first time we have faced a virus. But, we found that we can weaponize it and if you make it scary enough, you can get people to voluntarily give up their God given Constitutional Rights. Not only will they give up their Rights, they’ll lobby for their fellow citizens to give their Rights up for the greater good.

Pitiful.

^^^
Again. You will find the monkey standing in the line with this guy.

Unless we’re wearing masks ad infinitum, does N95 really matter? The virus is out there. It’s crossed species. We either find a true vaccine or we accept that 1% will perish on the path to global herd immunity. Are there any other real outcomes? Seems like anything else is just delaying the inevitable.

Found this post, by Balze Halze, in another thread that was locked. It is a pre-publication, non-peer reviewed study out of Israel. I hope he does not object to my posting it here. It does indicate that post-infectious (or "natural") immunity provides longer lasting protection from the Delta variant versus vaccinated immunity (based almost exclusively on the Pfizer vaccine). I have read the full article and I do not see evidence of grossly inappropriate methodology, though I am not an expert in the statistical methodologies they use (one reason why peer review is important, which of course takes significant time prior to full publication in a respected journal).

My only real critique of this study, with regards to comparing vaccination versus natural immunity, is that they do not account for the rate of symptomatic illness, hospitalization, or death with the primary infection of those they selected to compare to the vaccinated and un-infected populations. So, based on this study alone, you would conclude that if you did not have a serious illness the first go-round with Covid, your likelyhood of re-infection and/or symptomatic illness is less than if you got vaccinated without ever having Covid. This is a type of selection bias in the study, in that the people they selected for that group had survived the illness (which we know is the likely outcome for most people who get it). But dealing with percentages, and comparing survivors versus vaccinated, does not allow you to compare the population of people who have not had the virus to the population that has had the vaccine. I wish they would have discussed this in their commentary, or better yet, included people who dies from the primary infection in their data set.

Again, based only on this one study, of which I expect other similar studies to also come out and may or may not validate their findings, you can conclude that natural immunity is better than that from the vaccine. You can't necessarily conclude that getting Covid is better than getting the vaccine, because they did not expressly look at that. Interestingly, they saw a trend (though not statistically significant) that people who survived a Covid infection and later got at least the first dose of the vaccine had a lower risk of re-infection than those who survived Covid but did not get vaccinated later.

It is a very interesting study, and I very much appreciate Balze Halze for posting it. I do not think it is something that people who have not had Covid and not received a vaccine can rely on as yet for justification to not pursue vaccination. But it does appear to me to be a legitimate addition to the knowledge we have.
_______________________________________________

"Yeah, you don't need that shot if you decide to make a prudential choice ultimately not to get it, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. "Just go get it, sheep, and be done with it." Unbelievable.

Israeli Study Shows Natural Immunity 13x More Effective Than Vaccines At Stopping Delta

This analysis demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization due to the delta variant.

A new study out of Israel suggests natural infection offers a much better shield against the delta variant than vaccines, this is after Americans have been told that vaccines offer better protection than natural infections

Dr. Anthony Fauci and the rest of President Biden’s COVID advisors have been proven wrong about “the science” of COVID vaccines yet again.

The study was described by Bloomberg as “the largest real-world analysis comparing natural immunity – gained from an earlier infection – to the protection provided by one of the most potent vaccines currently in use.”

A few days ago, we noted how remarkable it was that the mainstream press was finally giving voice to scientists to criticize President Biden’s push to start doling out booster jabs. Well, this study further questions the credibility of relying on vaccines, given that the study showed that the vaccinated were ultimately 13x as likely to be infected as those who were infected previously, and 27x more likely to be symptomatic.

Alex Berenson, a science journalist who has repeatedly questioned the efficacy of vaccines and masks at preventing COVID, touted the study as enough to “end any debate over vaccines v natural immunity.”

1/ Wow. New Israeli preprint shows natural immunity to #SARSCoV2 is FAR superior to the artificial kind – vaccinated people were 13x as likely to be infected and 27x to have symptomatic infections as a matched cohort that was previously infected. And this is with Delta dominant. pic.twitter.com/hhD9h0vyMS

— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) August 25, 2021

2/ The paper also shows that offering previously infected people one dose slightly reduced their infection risk (though not enough to outweigh side effects, I would argue). Along with the other emerging data, this paper should end any debate over vaccines v natural immunity…

— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) August 25, 2021

3/ Source: https://t.co/DcCpBoMFWd

— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) August 25, 2021

Here’s an excerpt from a report by Science Magazine:

The new analysis relies on the database of Maccabi Healthcare Services, which enrols about 2.5 million Israelis. The study, led by Tal Patalon and Sivan Gazit at KSM, the system’s research and innovation arm, found in two analyses that people who were vaccinated in January and February were, in June, July, and the first half of August, six to 13 times more likely to get infected than unvaccinated people who were previously infected with the coronavirus.

In one analysis, comparing more than 32,000 people in the health system, the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 was 27 times higher among the vaccinated, and the risk of hospitalization was eight times higher.

This time, the data leave little doubt that natural infection truly is the better option for protection against the delta variant, despite the fact that the US won’t acknowledge the already infected as having antibodies protecting them from the virus.

As the first country to achieve widespread coverage by the vaccine, Israel is now in an unthinkable situation: daily case numbers have reached new record levels as the delta variant penetrates the vaccines’ protection like a hot knife slicing through butter.

At the very least, the results of the study are good news for patients who have already successfully battled COVID but show the challenge of relying exclusively on immunizations to move past the pandemic.

“This analysis demonstrated that natural immunity affords longer-lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization due to the delta variant,” the researchers said.

Unfortunately, the study also showed that any protection is time-limited. The protection offered by natural infection wanes over time, just like the protection afforded by vaccines: The risk of a vaccine-breakthrough delta case was 13x higher than the risk of developing a second infection when the original illness occurred during January or February 2021. That’s significantly more than the risk for people who were ill earlier in the outbreak.

What’s more, giving a single shot of the vaccine to those who had been previously infected also appeared to boost their protection. Still, the data don’t tell us anything about the long-term benefits of booster doses.

This latest data showing the vaccines don’t offer anywhere near the 90%+ protection that was originally advertised by the FDA after the emergency authorization. Other studies are finding harmful side effects caused by the mRNA jabs are also more prevalent than previously believed.

https://www.herald.ng/this-end...s-at-stopping-delta/

~Alan"

Barndg00, thank you for your participation here and the time you have given to answer questions.


I also appreciate your hard work during these times. My wife was a doctor in Mexico for well over a decade, and while she doesn't practice medicine here, she still works in the medical field.


We have not been vaccinated due to our age, risk factors, good health, and faith in therapeutics. Not to mention ethical concerns and side effect concerns.


Have you seen many unvaccinated people who have been properly taking Ivermectin and/or HCQ and Zinc? I know the mainstream narrative is that these do not work, but there is also a decent amount of evidence that they are effective treatments.

What has your experience been with them?

Again, thank you!

quote:

Originally posted by barndg00:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

Originally posted by barndg00:
As for masks, N95 masks work both ways, meaning they prevent spread from a sick individual, and also prevent a healthy individual from breathing in the virus.

Which I hope we can agree is irrelevant given probably 90%+ of the population isn't wearing N95 masks.

I listened to an immunologist discussing the vaccines a couple days ago, and he asserted that the current vaccines are not a solution to addressing this pandemic in his opinion given they 1) Do not prevent spread of the virus (the key attribute in attaining herd immunity), and 2) appear to lose effectiveness in a mere few months requiring continual boosters. His comments seemed reasonable to me. What would be your thoughts on his comments?

Part of the issue with the mask debate is that it has been made a black and white issue. N95s offer incredible protection from the spread of virus particles. That is not the same as saying that surgical masks and cotton masks provide zero protection. They do reduce the spread of larger particles, which will contain high levels of shed virus within them. No, they will not contain everything, but that's not the same as allowing all the virus to pass unabated. Additionally, there was research showing that gators, made from thin synthetic materials, actually worsened the spread of the virus by breaking up these larger particles into smaller particles that could then persist for longer in an area floating around. That regular masks do reduce the amount of virus a person who may not know they are infected/contagious is why I am in favor of elementary age children wearing them indoors in school (I am certain that that is something many parents disagree with for a variety of reasons). However, these kids do not have the opportunity to be vaccinated as yet, and I think it is imperative that they continue with in-person learning. I believe that we will see schools that are not wearing masks have higher levels of kids becoming infected and high levels of kids/teachers needing to quarantine, potentially forcing us back to online learning. That forces parents out of work and is harmful to the vast majority of students. I do not think the potential downsides of masks in this population is worth the potential harm. (My daughter has not had any issue with wearing a mask at school, nor have any of her friends. That said, I am not as highly educated on the fears parents seem to have about masks in school other than the fact of being forced to have their child wear one. It just seems like common sense to me, but I will certainly read anything that someone posts to the contrary here.)

Regarding the positions of the immunologist you listened to, is it possible to post who that was? I'd be interested in reviewing it. After seeing several people re-infected, either with "natural immunity" or "breakthrough infection" ie vaccinated immunity, I do not think this is a disease where we will actually see true herd immunity. (First, the definition of herd immunity is that such a large percentage of the population is immune to a disease that those who are not immune are basically never exposed to it to potentially get it.) We do not know whether vaccines or natural immunity will offer protection long enough to allow the virus to burn out to low levels in the world (I don't anticipate eradication is possible as coronaviruses mutate readily, new variants are likely to evade both natural and vaccinated immunity).

All that said, I don't think we have enough data to say which type of immunity is better and/or longer lasting. We will find out, but until then, I'm ok getting a booster. If it does become known and documented that natural immunity is long lasting, I'm not sure what I'll do. I certainly don't want to risk the suffering I've seen in so many.

This is what's been missing all along in this whole issue. I'm not sure I concur with all your positions, but I respect your feedback and willingness to discuss/debate the issue. If we'd have had far more of this and far less of the continual lies and hypocrisy, maybe that 40% of the population still unvaccinated would be more open to consider changing their position. Unfortunately as Mike Rowe noted, the credibility of the government and the medical community has been severely damaged, and I see nothing at this point that is going to change that reality.

Barndg00- I appreciate your responses; this debacle has obviously been weaponized for political leverage which has unfortunately removed any chance for it to be a purely scientific endeavor in terms of solving it. The only thing I can add is that the whole mask issue has been a debacle from the beginning. As everyone knows, the vast majority of people are using something which stands little chance of inhibiting transmission of aerosols or viral nuclei. This is compounded by the fact that many of them wear them day to day. I have not once seen “the system” treat them as a hazmat or direct them to disposed of properly. Add in that people touch things, touch their masks, their faces, eat and drink in between, etc. other than in a known high risk area, I just can’t see where masking does any good beyond stopping large droplets being immediately disseminated. Again, thanks for your input.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:I have not once seen “the system” treat them as a hazmat or direct them to disposed of properly.

Masks are not considered hazmat, even in medical and dental offices unless they are saturated to the point that fluid would be expressed by compression. I've never once had that happen in 30+ years of dental practice, but I suppose it could happen in surgery with a direct impact from an arterial bleed. A mask is no more hazmat than a Kleenex and can be disposed of in regular trash. I'd imagine that most hospitals use a segregated disposal chain when dealing with known Covid patients, but that certainly doesn't apply to the general public.

I had a acquaintance who once wore a N95 mask for 8 hours while working in a store. After work he removed the mask and started driving home. Within a couple minutes he got a pounding headache. While still driving his legs started to go numb. While still driving he started to have severe respiratory problems. Literally thought he was having a heart attack and had to pull off on the side of the road. He called his wife to come get him.

I can’t recall what the actual diagnosis was but bottom line was his doc told him never ever wear any mask for prolonged periods especially a N95 mask. His body had a reaction of some sort after he removed the mask. Their are many studies out there warning on prolonged mask usage causing acute respiratory problems. Right now we have a good many people so frightened I doubt they remove them to sleep.

The tv is going to be full of lawyer commercials in the not too distant future that if you wore this or that manufactures mask for more than X amount of hours a day you may be due a large financial compensation. No thanks on the mask.

quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
I'm not taking either side of this discussion.

I had Covid and spent 11 days in the hospital, was home for a week and started getting rapid heart beats. That put me back in the hospital for 3 days because it was, as I was told by multiple doctors, a side effect of Covid was AFIB. They got me back in sinus rhythm, the AFIB has not returned, I am on meds for that. AFIB is some scary and deadly stuff.

Having said all that, I'm asking WHY the general population can't get real N95 masks? All I've seen for sale for the last 18 months or so is those worthless surgical type cheap paper flimsy masks. You know the ones I'm talking about.

So, why are there no real N95 masks being pumped out for the general population?

If you want to get past this COVID fiasco situation, where are the N95 masks?

I would not mind wearing a real N95 mask if it would help to control COVID, but all we see are these cheap crappy ineffective paper masks. Worthless crap.

Thanks for letting me pop in to this thread, and thanks to Para for keeping things here under control. And thanks to Barndog for his thoughts.
.

I found a local source for 3M model 8210 N95s (at about $2.50 each): the Paint department of Home Depot. Made in USA. Had looked several times for them in the safety section (in Tools Dept.); nothing but the no-name KN95s. The other 3M model in Paint has the exhalation valve. I've been cautioned that these are great also, unless you are actively infected. They're in boxes of ten for something like $22.
They are available on-line also. As the Dr. is saying, fit is very important in effectiveness; facial hair growth, and jaw length/shape come into play. Given you may still be under a physician's care; seek their advice and recommendations also.

quote:

Originally posted by lastmanstanding:
I had a acquaintance who once wore a N95 mask for 8 hours while working in a store. After work he removed the mask and started driving home. Within a couple minutes he got a pounding headache. While still driving his legs started to go numb. While still driving he started to have severe respiratory problems. Literally thought he was having a heart attack and had to pull off on the side of the road. He called his wife to come get him.

I can’t recall what the actual diagnosis was but bottom line was his doc told him never ever wear any mask for prolonged periods especially a N95 mask. His body had a reaction of some sort after he removed the mask. Their are many studies out there warning on prolonged mask usage causing acute respiratory problems. Right now we have a good many people so frightened I doubt they remove them to sleep.

The tv is going to be full of lawyer commercials in the not too distant future that if you wore this or that manufactures mask for more than X amount of hours a day you may be due a large financial compensation. No thanks on the mask.

Exactly why OSHA (working with NIOSH and others) developed their fit testing protocols and regulations. For years, folks would be given masks/respirators with no health evaluation other than a check-list and the blessing of their supervisor. Quite a few people with underlying health conditions, and working hard for hours in often adverse conditions began to drop. They should be worn only while you are at risk of exposure and with breaks. I learned years ago that wearing an N95 (that is fitted properly) is the rough equivalent of adding about 25 pounds for your system to accommadate. It's a bit of a rabbithole, but during public health emergencies, those requirements for fit testing can be relaxed. Best guidance; check with your primary care physician before wearing them (as I did; my doc advised me to go N95, not face mask of cheap fabric).

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
Unless we’re wearing masks ad infinitum, does N95 really matter? The virus is out there. It’s crossed species. We either find a true vaccine or we accept that 1% will perish on the path to global herd immunity. Are there any other real outcomes? Seems like anything else is just delaying the inevitable.

This point should be addressed by everyone!

As an FYI for those of us with school age children, make the appointment to get them test as soon as they show symptoms. Don't wait the 4 days then try to get the appointment.

My oldest started on Thursday with sore throat, nausea, runny nose. By Saturday, he added loss of taste. Today, I'm trying to make him an appointment to get tested and the earliest I can get him in is Tuesday. Walgreen's site will automatically only allow appointments to be made 4 days after the date you entered that symptoms started. Had I tried to make the appoinment on Thursday, I'm sure I would have received an earlier appointment.

What is the test going to do?