that you "should" get every year?
Pfizer CEO says third Covid vaccine dose likely needed within 12 months
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said people will "likely" need a third dose of a Covid-19 vaccine within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated.www.cnbc.com
Devil's advocate: You could say that her chances of contracting Covid, getting really sick with Covid, and spreading it to her colleagues and residents have changed post-vax. Also, when she is at a nursing home she is still working with the most at-risk population. I'm sure the residents have all been vaccinated, but I guess I can see a reason for the continued precautions in her specific scenario (close contact healthcare with the elderly).
Let's mandate everyone in healthcare to take the vaccination yet still test them weekly. Wait, what?
I could actually explain all of this to you, but would it matter? I'll take advice from Dr. Fauci over the eye doctor 10/10 even if he was THE BEST eye doctor in the world.Very good question...
I'm not advocating a specific position, just commenting on the very specific situation of (1) close-contact healthcare with (2) the elderly.
This is been the problem with their logic from day one. If masks work, what do you need social distancing for? If social distancing works, what do you need masks for? It's one BS story after another that no one can verify or prove decisively one way or the other it seems. Now vaccines work, but you still need masks and distancing? How can anyone take Fauci as anything other than a clown and a tool.
Polio and small pox are 2 viruses that have not mutated --- yet. If they do the world will be in deep doo doo.
Dude come on. Dont you know that if we actually show proof that the left and liberals are wrong they will just change the definition? Now some one will cancel Webster until the definitions are changed.LOL maybe that's how you interpret post-vax. merriam-webster disagree
well at least you didn't address the mass as a bunch of 'crackers'.
If airbags are so effective, why do I need to wear a seatbelt?
The irony here is just how ‘far left’ he threw it...Very good question...
Yet the cities that did both the most are in the worsts shape, so I guess things aren't what they seem?
Right, as you said, there's a compounding effect of all of that stuff. Masks are pretty effective at keeping you from spreading disease, and somewhat less effective at protecting you from disease. But two people wearing masks are less likely to spread disease to each other. If people are socially distanced, then the chance of droplets even reaching your mask is lower.
It does prevent the spread of COVID, though.
www.advisory.com
This is a little counter-intuitive, but I think vaccine effectiveness doesn't quite mean that 10% of vaccinated people have an "ineffective" vaccine. It means that compared to an unvaccinated population, there will be 95% less infections. So, for instance, if you've got 100,000 people who are unvaccinated, and 1% get infected, then in a vaccinated population, you'd expect 50 infections rather than 1000. And we also know that those 50 people who get infected will be completely protected from severe illness by these vaccines.
I think they do, they're just being ornery because they don't like taking these measures.
Not really true, but there's a difference between what's effective in terms of individual communication of disease and what's effective as public health policy. For instance, you can tell people they have to wear masks indoors in public and outdoors when they can't social distance, and you can tell them to social distance in public, but you can't control what they do in private. If a lot of the spread was happening in private situations, then mandating masks in public might not be very effective for reducing the spread of the virus even if they work well for preventing spread between individuals.
............and apparently = very curable in animals.
