Welp just found out I have Covid19. I get sinus infections from time to time and thought it could be that but got tested just in case.
Still ready to take the vaccine when available.
Still ready to take the vaccine when available.
Covid vaccine tomorrow!!
- Thread starter krfuquamd
- Start date
Dude, something is wrong with you I think.....that's how you interpreted the above passage?
Saying the last 10 months sucked is putting it mildly .
Reading this thread makes me feel bad for how I act in the in game threads about Tony’s play calling. How the fvck can people judge others for getting the vaccine and tell a fvcking DOCTOR he’s wrong just because they read an article somewhere.
There are several anti viral medications that have shown to be effective and yet completely ignored by the media and most everyone in the government. It makes me wonder what the real agenda is.How bout this to help control the spread?
Molnupiravir: The Drug That May 'Completely' Stop the Spread of Coronavirus In 24 Hours
In early animal testing, this antiviral drug was found to prevent virus carriers from developing severe symptoms and transmitting the disease.www.entrepreneur.com
Here's another one, Ivermectin, that along with doxycyline prove to stop covid 19 in it's tracks. The drug is very safe and readily available
https://www.healio.com/news/primary...n-effective-for-covid19-prophylaxis-treatment
The flu kills people - particularly those who have vulnerabilities from a health perspective. The flu makes people very sick. Some people choose to get flu vaccines and some do not.
I have never seen a thread where people are making judgmental comments on both sides regarding the flu vaccine.
I respect both sides of this discussion because ultimately it should be a personal decision. There is no “obligation for the greater good” responsibility here - not for something that statistically doesn’t rise to anywhere close to a level that would warrant such critical thinking. The obligation is to be responsible and accountable to others if you are a person that could potentially infect someone who is at risk. If you have a family member in a nursing home or has some pre-existing conditions, then you should get tested regularly and be responsible and careful. If you choose to, then get the vaccine. That’s it.
I have never seen a thread where people are making judgmental comments on both sides regarding the flu vaccine.
I respect both sides of this discussion because ultimately it should be a personal decision. There is no “obligation for the greater good” responsibility here - not for something that statistically doesn’t rise to anywhere close to a level that would warrant such critical thinking. The obligation is to be responsible and accountable to others if you are a person that could potentially infect someone who is at risk. If you have a family member in a nursing home or has some pre-existing conditions, then you should get tested regularly and be responsible and careful. If you choose to, then get the vaccine. That’s it.
Except that’s not really how vaccines work. You need a certain portion of the population to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity or the disease will make a comeback.
Maybe you can enlighten us on the purported Russian collusion hoax as well as the purported most secure election in history...we can play this game all day...
After reading the article, doesn't seem like anyone is ignoring the treatment. There are good results in the study but need to be looked at further and studied more by others. That takes time.
On the pill from Emory and Georgia State, that is still in trial phases so again that will take time to see the full results.
Please take your government/media conspiracy elsewhere.
You have readily available options, tried and true, and known to be completely safe, yet none are seriously persued or toughted and you want more time to study them? Ivermectin has been around since the 70's! I know there's no room for logic in a Lib's mind, but how do you explain toughting the best options are brand new barely tested drugs using tech that no one knows the long term effects of over ones that are cheap and show efficacy with minimal if any side effects?
You keep on trusting that the gubment has your best interests at heart.
Just because it's been around since the 70s doesn't mean it should be effective for Covid-19. The study in the article you showed was around 400 people. That just isn't a large enough sample size to see exactly how effective it is.You have readily available options, tried and true, and known to be completely safe, yet none are seriously persued or toughted and you want more time to study them? Ivermectin has been around since the 70's! I know there's no room for logic in a Lib's mind, but how do you explain toughting the best options are brand new barely tested drugs using tech that no one knows the long term effects of over ones that are cheap and show efficacy with minimal if any side effects?
You keep on trusting that the gubment has your best interests at heart.
Again that takes time and more studies to be performed. Maybe in the future this will be something that can be used for treatment. But at this time we don't know enough.
Lastly, don't use the word gubment. Any credible argument is lost at that point.
I like that you haven't had one rebuttal to any of my points made towards you. Another win for logic.
I’m gettin my second shot tomorrow (Moderna). Anyone have rough symptoms afte the second shot?
ive made plans to sleep all day Saturday night and sunday
ive made plans to sleep all day Saturday night and sunday
Zero issues, but had a few friends that had fever/chills/aches from hours 12-24 post shot.
Good news is, 24 hours on the dot and you're home free from everyone I've talked to. You'll prob have basically nothing but a sore arm and hypersensitive to the thoughts of "hmm am i feeling a headache coming on or my imagination?"
Your 5g also does not improve. A slight rip off imo.
2.5 more pages until the conversation has completely devolved into left and right wing extremists hurling insults at each other
It has really been amazing and awesome to see the fact that it's been 5 pages while maintaining a respectful discussion. This is such a difficult topic, because even the medical community is full of differing opinions. How hard must it be for non-medical people to try to understand something that the medical community cannot agree on?
There are a few key points about this vaccine that need to be addressed, and sorry ahead of time for the long post:
1) It is not yet known if the vaccine prevents transmission. It is easy to say that by getting the vaccine you are protecting those around you. However, the truth of the matter is, we don't know if that is a true statement. The Pfizer study and Moderna studies did not address this question. That's why it is still recommended that one should wear masks and socially distance, even after getting the vaccine. It is unknown whether you can still contract the virus if vaccinated. It may prevent you from getting sick, but may not prevent you from contracting it and giving it to someone else. So are you really protecting those around you? It is entirely unknown.
2) The 95% efficacy statement is a weak observational statistical statement. Basically, in the Pfizer study, they innoculated a group of people and asked them to report back if they experienced any upper respiratory symptoms. They tested those who did, and waited until they got around 100 cases. They did not account for socially distancing, potential exposures, etc. Of the 100-something cases, 95% of them tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Now, this is purely an observational statement. But with such a low sample size, and the potential for confounders, it is difficult to truly report 95% efficacy.
3) This is not a vaccine, rather it is gene therapy. This isn't an anti-vaccination statement, by any means. Traditionally, vaccines involve exposure to a weakened version of the virus itself and allowing your body to naturally develop antibodies against it. In this case, the vaccine involves injecting mRNA into your body. The mRNA doesn't actually incorporate into your DNA, but instructs your own cells to start expressing the SARS-CoV-2 viral spike protein. As such, your body may either see this as a non-foreign particle and not mount an immune response, or it will develop antibodies against this spike protein. Regardless, your cells will begin to express this protein, which is something normally seen in gene therapy, where your genes are adjusted to create cellular changes. This has never successfully been done in humans before, and I truly hope that it is successful. However, considering that there is only 2-3 month data on the vaccine, long-term side effects and complications are unknown.
4) How does the immunity from the vaccine differ from natural immunity? Again, we don't know. There is little data on how long natural and vaccine-related immunity lasts. The medical literature that I have read has shown that certain antibodies may take a slight dip at 3 mos, but it is unclear if it affects your overall immunity. Also, your memory white blood cells still express that memory at 8 months, so you are likely still immune if that is the case. However, these are early studies with small sample sizes, so nothing can be determined with certainty. I also know of a case where someone (a medical professional) was vaccinated, decided to get an antibody test a few weeks later, and tested negative. What does that mean? We don't know. The CDC guidelines state that 90 days after you receive your second shot, you should quarantine if exposed to COVID-19. Does that mean that the vaccine only lasts 3 months and people will need to receive one every 3 months? It is not yet known.
5) Consider the adverse reactions - could the cure actually be worse than the disease? We don't know. Several of my colleagues who were vaccinated exhibited significant severe reactions (high fever, aches, chills, etc). Is this truly okay? If you look at the VARES data (vaccine adverse reaction data), there are pregnant women reporting miscarriages (2nd and 3rd trimester) within days of the vaccine. There are dozens of accounts of the immune system attacking platelets (a healthy Florida doctor passed away from this). There are accounts of people with symptoms so severe they are in bed for days and feel like they have the disease. There are deaths from the vaccine. Otherwise healthy people are experiencing severe reactions to the vaccine. Obviously nothing is without risk. But the question is, as these numbers add up, should we be recommending a mass population vaccination? Should we continue to recommend the vaccine to pregnant women despite reports of miscarriages and without data looking for potential birth defects? Should be recommend to breastfeeding women, when they were excluded in the studies and there is no information on potential adverse effects for their babies? Do healthy people in their teens, 20s, and 30s need the vaccine? Do children, who rarely exhibit more than mild symptoms no different than any other run-of-the-mill virus, need to get vaccinated? These again are all unknowns.
6) Why is there not more of a national push for nutritional improvement? Major risk factors for severe COVID-19 and death include Vitamin D deficiency and obesity. Why no national recommendation for normalizing Vitamin D levels and losing weight? Zinc has been shown in the literature to prevent severe disease as well. I truly believe that if, in the beginning of the pandemic, the national focus was to normalize everyone's Vitamin D levels, encourage Zinc supplementation, and encourage healthy eating and weight loss, you would see a much lower number of cases and deaths.
I am not an anti-vaxxer, nor do I think this technology should be dismissed. It is a true human achievement, what has been done through Operation Warp Speed. I do think that there are certain patient populations that should seriously consider this vaccine. I also do not disagree with anyone who decides for themselves that they would like to get it. However, there is a profound lack of long-term data, and many serious unanswered questions that should be considered. Please make sure that you do the research for yourself prior to deciding on it, and continue to ask the questions that are necessary to allow us to continue to gain wisdom through all of this.
God bless.
My second shot was easier than the first. Still had a sore arm the 1st night though but no fatigue or anything else. I've heard some people had symptoms a bit longer from the second dose than the first.
Thanks for the post, but I have to clarify a few things.
1) It is not yet known if the vaccine prevents transmission.
It's true that we don't know whether it prevents transmission, but it is very very likely that it does. But that is COMPLETELY missing the point. The vaccine has so far shown to prevent serious disease and hospitalization, in particular, by nearly 100%. The virus will be endemic like the flu, and the vaccine will finally allow us to actually treat it like the flu.
2) The 95% efficacy statement is a weak observational statistical statement. Basically, in the Pfizer study, they innoculated a group of people and asked them to report back if they experienced any upper respiratory symptoms. They tested those who did, and waited until they got around 100 cases. They did not account for socially distancing, potential exposures, etc. Of the 100-something cases, 95% of them tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Now, this is purely an observational statement. But with such a low sample size, and the potential for confounders, it is difficult to truly report 95% efficacy
This is almost entirely false. That isn't how they arrived at the 95% efficacy number at all. The way they arrived to the number was of the 43000 trial participants, 170 patients tested positive for COVID19. Of those 170 patients, 8 were in the vaccine group, and 162 were in the placebo. None of those 8 required hospitalization. This is extremely strong data. Just to note, neither the trial participants not their doctors administering the shots knew whether they were getting the placebo or the vaccine so this effectively accounts for your confounders.
3) your body may either see this as a non-foreign particle and not mount an immune response, or it will develop antibodies against this spike protein. Regardless, your cells will begin to express this protein, which is something normally seen in gene therapy, where your genes are adjusted to create cellular changes.
The trials have pretty much shown that your cells DO develop antibodies to it. Also, know that the mRNA is broken down. Your body doesn't just keep making the spike protein indefinitely.
This has never successfully been done in humans before, and I truly hope that it is successful. However, considering that there is only 2-3 month data on the vaccine, long-term side effects and complications are unknown.
artificial mRNA was first injected in humans in 2008. mRNA vaccines have gone through phase 1 and 2 trials in humans since 2011 and have so far been safe. There is far more than 2-3 month safety data. The idea of being afraid of long-term side effects and complications seems silly to me for such a targeted therapy. This isn't chemotherapy, or some radical treatment.
5) Consider the adverse reactions - could the cure actually be worse than the disease? We don't know. Several of my colleagues who were vaccinated exhibited significant severe reactions (high fever, aches, chills, etc). Is this truly okay? If you look at the VARES data (vaccine adverse reaction data), there are pregnant women reporting miscarriages (2nd and 3rd trimester) within days of the vaccine. There are dozens of accounts of the immune system attacking platelets (a healthy Florida doctor passed away from this). There are accounts of people with symptoms so severe they are in bed for days and feel like they have the disease. There are deaths from the vaccine. Otherwise healthy people are experiencing severe reactions to the vaccine. Obviously nothing is without risk. But the question is, as these numbers add up, should we be recommending a mass population vaccination?
This is just getting crazy. Almost none of this is true. Miscarriages in pregnant women have NOT been attributed to the vaccine, however we KNOW covid infection causes 10-25% miscarriage in mild disease and 60% in critical. disease. NO reactions to the vaccine have resulted in hospitalization outside of the EXTREMELY rare anaphylaxis (most recent data showing 0.0006%) which has been rapidly treated in each case. Finally, NO DEATH HAS BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE VACCINE FROM VAERS (not VARES by the way) (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html). Where the heck are you reading this stuff?
6) Why is there not more of a national push for nutritional improvement? Major risk factors for severe COVID-19 and death include Vitamin D deficiency and obesity. Why no national recommendation for normalizing Vitamin D levels and losing weight? Zinc has been shown in the literature to prevent severe disease as well. I truly believe that if, in the beginning of the pandemic, the national focus was to normalize everyone's Vitamin D levels, encourage Zinc supplementation, and encourage healthy eating and weight loss, you would see a much lower number of cases and deaths.
There is conflicting data on whether Vit D deficiency causes severe disease, especially when the deficiency is INCREDIBLY pervasive in the US and often means little (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2775003)
There is no data showing Vit D treats COVID. Encouraging healthy eating and weight loss will certainly decrease the deaths and cases as you would be reducing co-morbidities that are known to increase mortality.
Yes, we should all do our research. But, research should start by talking to your doctor and (or if you are a doctor proceed to- requesting/reading data from RELIABLE medical sources and medical journals (JAMA, New England Journal) etc.
Last edited:
Thanks for your response, Saber. It is certainly not my intent to post misinformation, nor try to convince anyone which way they should decide. I am an MD, and have been reading data from reliable sources. I am also not of the mindset that everything published in these journals is 100% reliable, nor answers all questions. How many times, over the years, have you read a journal article, only to read a contradictory article a few months later? How many times have you seen a journal article completely contradict what has been considered dogma for years? The NEMJ and JAMA are absolutely reputable journals. Having said that, medical science does not have all the answers, despite the fact that we would like to think so. Heck, look at Fauci's recommendations from the beginning of this pandemic to now. His opinion changed on masks, quarantines, and whether we should worry about this thing at all. Medical science is ever changing, and we should continue to constantly question everything, even if published in a reputable journal. Throughout this pandemic, information has been put out consistently (with or without peer-review) just for the sake of saying something in a search for answers. All I am saying is that we need to continue to ask the important questions.
1) I truly hope that the vaccine prevents transmission, but "very likely" does not answer the question. It very well may be true, but the question hasn't been answered. I bring up the point only because the national narrative is that we should all do our part in getting vaccinated to prevent the spread. However, the question of spread has never been addressed, nor truly followed to know the answer at this point. If the answer was that it prevented transmission, then there would be no need for vaccinated people to wear a mask. As I said, the answer very well may be that it prevents transmission, and I hope that that is the case. However, we simply don't know at this point. The CDC states as such. I also am not stating that no one should get it. I do think that the at-risk populations should get it. I am wary, however, of a mass public inoculation which includes low-risk people, without long-term data.
2) I also understand what you're saying about the Pfizer data. Didn't have it in front of me to quote the exact numbers as I was posting, sorry about that. Without accounting for exposures and confounders, how can one truly be sure of efficacy? Yes, randomization helps as much as possible, but without following all patients for antibody response and by expecting people to self-report, it decreases the reliability of the data. Not saying that the vaccine is not effective, but not certain about the 95% efficacy rate. I am reading other publications that look at the data and state the efficacy around 60-75%. Still effective, but not 95%.
4) CDC guidelines state this:
However, vaccinated persons with an exposure to someone with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 are not required to quarantine if they meet all of the following criteria†:
- Are fully vaccinated (i.e., ≥2 weeks following receipt of the second dose in a 2-dose series, or ≥2 weeks following receipt of one dose of a single-dose vaccine)
- Are within 3 months following receipt of the last dose in the series
- Have remained asymptomatic since the current COVID-19 exposure
- Persons who do not meet all 3 of the above criteria should continue to follow current quarantine guidance after exposure to someone with suspected or confirmed COVID-19.
5) With all respect, to say that none of what I said about adverse reactions is true is, in itself, naïve. And no, I'm not following right-wing extremist websites to get information. The point is, there are going to be people who react, and those that don't. There are likely genetic susceptibilities that we can't predict and account for. Look up information about the H1N1 vaccine Pandemrix as an example. As an aside, I've seen colleagues of mine go down for a while with difficult reactions to the vaccine. Just a question - if these reactions occurred to this degree with the flu shot every year, would people be signing up en masse for it annually? Also, if we are expected to get a shot every few months to maintain immunity, should we really be doing it in light of these reactions? And yes, I am aware that it's VAERS, not VARES, just a mistype. No need to question my credibility there. As I said, nothing is without risk. But care needs to be taken before making the decision to get it, as opposed to following the national narrative.
6) Easy to cherry-pick a study about Vitamin D... here's one regarding Vitamin D and the impact on ICU admission: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960076020302764?via=ihub.
One of the main documented reasons that the African-American population is at an increased risk for severe-COVID is due to higher rates of Vitamin D deficiency. It's a low-cost, low-risk, high-reward treatment. Should have been pushed in the beginning. What would it hurt? According to your link, even Fauci takes Vitamin D. The MedCram channel on Youtube has some helpful information about this as well. The point is, it potentially prevents the disease, or at least severe disease. I didn't say anything about treating COVID-19 with it, rather trying to prevent severe disease with it.
Thanks again, Saber, for your points. Healthy discussion is important, as it helps me, and all of us improve, which then helps the general public that we serve. Again, not intending to post any misinformation, nor sway anyone in a negative way. Medicine is an inexact science, and, as you know, a "practice." It is truly my hope that we have the answer to all of these questions soon and life can get back to normal.
Last edited:
Gr
Great post and follow up post. I am not taking the vaccine. Not because I a crazy anti- vaxxer. I am a metabolically healthy male with no co morbidity’s. I am at my ideal body weight. I excercise regularly and eat healthy. I take dose of Vit D,C, and Zinc daily. I realize I may get it tomorrow and could potentially have a bad case or even a deadly case. However I would rather take my chances with the virus than inject something into my body that was developed in 9 months and never been successfully used on humans. Operation “warp speed” LOL. Anyone who says that they know what the long-term effects will be is either mistaken or a liar. We simply do not know. We do know that the recovery in survival rate for COVID-19 is very very high. I’d rather focus on prevention for myself. I’ve also heard some Dr’s express concerns about the vaccine potentially (unknown) creating autoimmune issues down the road. Like I said I assessed my own and my family’s risk and will not be taking it.
And that's a cause for celebratory exclamation points? They're telling you that you still have to wear a mask after getting the shot so it aint like it's some miracle vaccination.
I'm 45 and I dont care about protocols. I've worn a mask 0 times and celebrated all the holidays with my extended family.
Everything about this virus has been idiotic. Just look at the B-ball players who breathe, slobber, and sweat all over each other on the floor only to go sit 6 feet apart on the bench.
This virus has illustrated perfectly just how damn stupid Americans have become and how common sense has become a thing of the past.
Definitely have to agree with your last sentence.
Question is, if he is a MD and so hot about getting it, why is he just now getting it . Has been available for health care workers for months
I've had the 2 shots from Moderna. First shot was on Jan. 5 and 2nd shot on Feb. 2.
I had a fever start about 8 hrs after each shot and the fever lasted 16-18 hrs. Just take pain reliever and you'll be fine. I worked the day after the 2nd shot, but I popped excedrine all day.
It's been almost 2 weeks since my last shot and I'm fine. 5G reception is excellent 😉.
If you're afraid of the "vaccine" (it is actually a therapeutic) then you should also fear any sterile injection. There is risk any time you get a needle poked into your body. There is also risk any time you receive anesthesia. Personally, I would rather get fixed than wait on Earth to achieve herd immunity the old fashioned way. #YOLO
I had a fever start about 8 hrs after each shot and the fever lasted 16-18 hrs. Just take pain reliever and you'll be fine. I worked the day after the 2nd shot, but I popped excedrine all day.
It's been almost 2 weeks since my last shot and I'm fine. 5G reception is excellent 😉.
If you're afraid of the "vaccine" (it is actually a therapeutic) then you should also fear any sterile injection. There is risk any time you get a needle poked into your body. There is also risk any time you receive anesthesia. Personally, I would rather get fixed than wait on Earth to achieve herd immunity the old fashioned way. #YOLO
Last edited:
Thanks, I edited my post to remove the CDC guidelines section. You are right about the post 90 day criteria. I'm not meaning to question your credibility personally, just questioning some points. I understand that neither of us are specialists in this field. Guessing from your name you are a Urologist and I'm an Interventional Cardiologist.
I still argue that those with "severe" reactions to the vaccine have been extremely extremely low. Outside of a few case reports, there is no data to support the vaccine has caused any serious reaction.
I'd say the same mentality you have with Vit D ("What would it hurt?") is the mentality we should have about the vaccine. It has shown to be extremely safe. Having a sore arm and fatigue for a few days has resulted in 0 hospitalizations and 0 long term effects. I'd argue the long term risks of a covid infection, even in healthy individuals is FAR more risky than the vaccine. We know this virus can linger and there is already evidence showing increased heart muscle scar tissue in healthy young people with mild infections.
Of course we must balance the risk and reward of the vaccine, but I think that decision should be incredibly easy for the vast majority of people.
Children have to be vaccinated to attend public school. My dog has to be vaccinated to be boarded.
This isn't Boston Tea party stuff people.
Not all children go to public school. And not all vaccines are the same. Many are obviously good and have been around for decades. Operation warp speed with relatively new technology.....not so much. The numbers continue to plummet and the death rates and even long hauler numbers are small. To mandate a vaccine to travel to Fla is ludicrous. How about everyone who wants to protect themselves with a vaccine be my guest. It’s a personal choice. Those of us who would rather take a chance with the virus....that’s also a personal choice . If you have a vaccine why would you care. You’re protected. It shouldn’t infringe on my freedom to travel.
Congrats I guess? I’m happy you’ve still been able to enjoy life.
I’ve known 2 people who’ve died. 1 of which was a marathon runner at the age of 45.
Ive also known people whohaven’t recovered taste or smell after having it months ago.
Cool strawman, bro. Do you get upset when the stupid gubberment takes away your freedom with a passport application to travel abroad?
If the people of Florida decide to require a vaccine for out of state visitors then that's their right. I do not care.
Gosh, you’re such an internet badass. I bet you really showed the government by not wearing a mask.
