Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pahnzoh t1_iw2y8a4 wrote

Reply to comment by dj_narwhal in Farmington child hospitalized for RSV in Maine after family cannot find NH beds by every1getslaid

Turns out the vaccine skeptics were actually right. The virus mutated so fast that the vaccines almost useless for the general population right now. But is that really shocking with how quickly they were developed?

Not disputing that they may have some limited positive effects in some groups as to fighting the virus, but doesn't seem to do jack shit for transmission at this point.

Now that the hospitals have a labor shortage I'm sure the hospitals are regretting succumbing to the church of covid braintrust.

−47

thekuroikenshi t1_iw3726h wrote

You are making huge leaps in logic between (a) virus mutation, (b) transmission among the populace, and (c) "quick" development of the vaccine.

(a) That SARS-CoV-2 mutates quickly makes it that much harder to develop vaccines against it. Unless we find other structures on the virus that are less prone to mutation and we can attack those, it will be an uphill battle no matter what. You only have to look at the flu and the flu vaccine to see how much work have left to do.

(b) It's not much of a stretch to say that vaccines helped to reduce general populace transmission. Vaccinated > immune system clamps down on COVID viral load earlier > less viral particles spread around. The problem is that SARS-CoV-2 can infect at a relatively low threshold, it looks like.

(c) mRNA vaccines have been in development for several decades now: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w. We had the mRNA vaccine a few weeks after the pandemic swept the world. This is hindsight though, after clinical trials involving over 46,000 people all over the world indicated the safety and efficacy of the vaccines. You don't know this until you put in the work.

​

>Now that the hospitals have a labor shortage I'm sure the hospitals are regretting succumbing to the church of covid braintrust.

If you think labor shortages have nothing to do with the crush of COVID patients they've had to deal with during this pandemic and now the surge of RSV, you are naive.

23

Beautiful_Repeat_718 t1_iw46fow wrote

Let's also not exclude the fact that the mass exodus of adequate medical staff was also partially due in part to inadequate working conditions, long hours and piss-poor treatment for shit pay, as well as the possibility that many contracted the virus and died as a result of trying to deal with the overwhelming number of patients being admitted and treated for Covid.

8

foodandart t1_iw4f6xb wrote

> long hours and piss-poor treatment for shit pay,

Ain't that the truth. I work with a woman, who went to work in healthcare and spent a ton of money for training, and of course, lots of time and lo, she was over and done with it because of the shit pay, crap supervisors and even more miserable hours.

When a service sector job offers better wages and scheduling, Houston, the Medical Industry's got a problem...

6

Beautiful_Repeat_718 t1_iw6f7rl wrote

Yeah, my sister in law was in a nursing program when Covid made it's way here. They fast tracked her education and basically said she would get her certification by working through the pandemic. A year and a half later, she was cleaning houses because it was more money and less stress.

1

petergriffin999 t1_iw38byy wrote

The effect on transmission is zero, and the duration of transmissibility as it relates to peak viral load still had no impact on the case studies.

Check the lancet journal of medicine report from last October.

The data shows that for those at risk, it can help prevent more serious side effects. But that's it.

It has no measurable beneficial effect on either acquiring or transmitting the virus, in comparison to someone that is unvaccinated.

The data also shows now that the side effects re: heart problems, is due to the vaccine, not COVID-19. That doesn't mean it's evil or a plot or that the benefits might not outweigh the heart risk, for people who are at risk from severe problems due to COVID-19.

But as far as the people who said that it's a personal decision re: risk / reward, they were absolutely correct. Everyone who criticized them as "plague rats" were wrong.

−10

foodandart t1_iw4g6ws wrote

> Everyone who criticized them as "plague rats" were wrong.

Oh, I think there's a ton of unvaccinated people that got struck with Covid that are left permanently crippled with heart, lung, kidney and liver issues that might beg to differ, never mind the dead ones..

Pretty much every person I know that has been vaccinated and caught Covid, has had at worst a few days of minor cold-like symptoms.

The only relatives I have that have died from this? Unvaccinated.

4

petergriffin999 t1_iw4siy9 wrote

You don't know what the term "plague rats" means.

Like I said in my post, it can help people who are at risk

But the term "plague rats" means "plague spreaders". Vaccinated or not vaccinated, it makes no difference regarding the spread.

0

Darwins_Dog t1_iw72hr2 wrote

Paper after paper has found that a COVID infection carries a much higher risk of cardiovascular problems than the vaccine. You are straight up wrong there.

Vaccine effects on transmission haven't really been studied because of ethics. Don't mistake lack of any evidence for evidence against. There are a few studies out there that have found that it does reduce transmission. It would be really weird if vaccines reduced infection severity and duration without affecting transmission. All of those are linked to viral loads so reducing one will help the others.

3

petergriffin999 t1_iw7g8sb wrote

Patently untrue. The study I'm referring to showed of > 1000 households where 1 person had COVID (half vaxxed, half not) what was the effect on other family members that shared the household, and visitors, where there was also a good mix of vaxxed and not vaxxed.

Some acquired the virus, some didn't. But even those results were evenly distributed among vaxxed and non vaxxed.

−1

Darwins_Dog t1_iw7rpi3 wrote

What's untrue exactly? Here's a review of more than one study that found reduced infection and transmission potential. The results aren't as clear cut as those for preventing severe infection because it's much more difficult to study transmission (ethically and logistically) in a robust method.

Also, when I said it would be really weird for a vaccine to reduce disease severity and not transmission potential, I mean that there's no known mechanism by which that can happen. A vaccine can't reduce only the virus particles that stay in the body and skip the ones destined to be expelled. The immune system doesn't work that way.

2

thekuroikenshi t1_iw9vrwo wrote

The language you're using - "patently untrue" - is really strong for conclusions drawn from scientific study. Any good scientist couches their terms carefully for the very reason that because it's so damn ridiculously hard to prove causal relationships.

2

Go_fahk_yourself t1_iw5aqpk wrote

Boy oh boy, according to the down votes the truth certainly does hurt. That’s what fear does, you can stick their noses in the truth all day and they will still believe the lie.

−2

shy-bae t1_iw72009 wrote

Yeah, my triple vaxxed spouse picked it up at work and got sick. Then four days later, I (unvaxxed) caught it (I didn’t go out in that time frame so I couldn’t have caught it from anyone else).

We were both sick the same amount of time with the same symptoms lol.

−2

petergriffin999 t1_iw7ft7e wrote

Yep. Supposedly there is a benefit (to the vaccine) in terms of how hard it hits you, I'm seen conflicting studies on that so at this point I'm just giving it the benefit of the doubt as far as that goes.

But in terms of whether or not you acquire the virus, OR transmit it: vaccine has zero or negligible impact.

0

Dasmer t1_iw2yn72 wrote

No, they were not. The vaccine is still effective against preventing major health complications. You are misinformed to an extreme by fools and grifters.

21

pahnzoh t1_iw2zmw7 wrote

I guess you missed the middle comment I made. Not saying it's 100% useless.

https://time.com/6230059/covid-19-variants-omicron-vaccine/

But, anyone still worrying about COVID is sad. Move on.

−20

Dasmer t1_iw32pup wrote

I did not, “limited positive effects” does not translate to “can prevent you from dying hooked up to a breathing tube.” The vaccine is an incredibly powerful tool to preserve human life. Because of that, I am not afraid or worried about COVID, but I will be again if people shirk the vaccine which causes hospitals to clog up and critical care is denied to those that have illnesses without an easy to take vaccine.

19

pahnzoh t1_iw3btbz wrote

I guess you ignored the 3 day old article I posted saying the new variants evade the vaccines quite effectively.

The most important thing we can do is to get everyone in this country to stop being obese and unhealthy.

−7

[deleted] t1_iw3kntg wrote

[removed]

12

pahnzoh t1_iw3zppu wrote

Character assassination is easier than responding on the merits.

Trust me, I'm much more educated than you. Unfortunately I don't eat less soy though.

−3

Dasmer t1_iw4sdj1 wrote

Why are you mentioning the frequency of your soy ingestion?

5

foodandart t1_iw4hr78 wrote

> The most important thing we can do is to get everyone in this country to stop being obese and unhealthy.

Yeah, that's not going to happen. Too much plastic in the environment now, all those xenoestrogens fucking everyone's metabolic processes up.

2

Crazy_Hick_in_NH t1_iw66tbn wrote

Yeah, easier said than done…poor people can’t eat healthy, it’s too friggin expensive.

1

Darwins_Dog t1_iw73jfh wrote

IDK if you knew this, but Time isn't a scientific journal. This is a fear mongering piece intended for people like you to share as proof that vaccines don't work. The non-editorialized data are pretty clear that vaccines do work, just not as well against new variants.

1

pahnzoh t1_iw7f1iv wrote

It's referring to actual studies.

I'm talking about the vaccines performance now. Not a year ago or whenever in the past.

People are so dogmatic about vaccines as soon as they see the word their reptilian brain just goes haywire. It's okay to admit its a complex issue and the vaccines are not that great in November 2022 since the predominant strains in circulation have heavily mutated.

0

Darwins_Dog t1_iw7wbef wrote

It includes a lot of links to make it look like they refer to actual research, but very little reference to actual research. Of the 10 links in the article, 5 are to other articles written by Time, 2 are to data about the prevalence of omicron variants, 1 is the GSAID homepage, and 1 is a treatment guideline update for monoclonal antibody treatment. Also at least 3 of the linked organizations (CDC, NIH, and GSAID) recommend vaccines and boosters for anyone eligible.

So 1 of 10 references is an actual (preprint) article about reduced vaccine efficacy. It also shows (figure 1b, c, d) that vaccination boosters provide a substantial increase in titers of neutralizing antibodies to all variants examined.

The point of this article is for people to read it while "researching" vaccine information and share it to bolster an argument. It contains almost no relevant information and what it has it heavily editorialized. I guess I can't fault them too much because it worked on you 100%.

2

Darwins_Dog t1_iw344qj wrote

The vast majority of medical professionals that were fired or left over COVID vaccines were receptionists and file clerks and the like. Almost no one with medical education left the field because of vaccine requirements. There was a nursing shortage before the pandemic, and many more left due to burnout. Seeing people die from a preventable disease because they wouldn't get a vaccine will do that.

11

Tai9ch t1_iw38bmu wrote

> Almost no one with medical education left the field because of vaccine requirements.

Do you have some basis for that claim, or are you simply arbitrarily asserting something that would be true if your worldview is correct?

−5

Darwins_Dog t1_iw3btaf wrote

I read articles about people leaving and of the ones that broke down the numbers, most people quitting were not nurses. Most articles omit the breakdown and try to find at least one nurse to play to people with your bias, but it's still usually <1% of total staff that choose to leave. Almost no one with medical education chose to leave because of COVID vaccine mandates. This is true if only because almost no one chose to leave healthcare over it.

Most hospitals expect all staff to be up to date on vaccinations and that now includes COVID. Vaccine requirements at hospitals are completely normal and good.

7

foodandart t1_iw4hby0 wrote

Dude, vaccines are the mandated norm for MD's and nurses.

Protects them and keeps the doctors and nurses from being the vectors that spread sickness as they go from patient to patient, room to room.

Any MD or nurse that says otherwise is lying for political reasons.

6

Tai9ch t1_iw4saig wrote

> Dude, vaccines are the mandated norm for MD's and nurses.

Are all healthcare workers mandated to get the TB vaccine?

−3

Darwins_Dog t1_iw74gej wrote

TB is rare in the US so probably not. I worked in a hospital kitchen and we had a list of required vaccinations. It's just part of the job when you work anywhere in the medical field.

3

Beautiful_Repeat_718 t1_iw46ogq wrote

Just anecdotal, but yeah the only person I know who worked in a hospital setting that was telling me the vaccine wasn't worth it, was someone who worked in the billing department of a hospital.

3

Darwinbc t1_iw344wo wrote

its not shocking because mRNA vaccines were being developed since the 80's

2

pahnzoh t1_iw3bi02 wrote

And all of them failed until covid, which was only marginally successful.

−11