The downvotes and flagging the GP is receiving should be interpreted to be Scientific Proof that ZERO Regulatory Capture exists at the CDC, and further, Regulatory Capture is a Right Wing hoax seeded by Russian Intelligence and spread only by White Nationalists.
On the off chance that this isn’t supposed to be flame-bait. The CDC has been updating their recommendations as new information comes out which isn’t really the same as being wrong unless you have reason to believe they had better information and choose not to act on it.
But yeah, if you believe that it’s too early and not enough research on the effectiveness of booster shots vs. new variants then you should fall back to recommendations that have been tested for longer.
* Wear masks in areas with poor air circulation or air recirculation.
* Keep a 10ft distance from others.
* Avoid being around other people when not necessary.
* If you show symptoms or come in contact with someone who tests positive quarantine for two weeks.
* Get vaccinated and/or boosted if you haven’t already.
The CDC has been making fairly optimistic recs for the vaccinated but you can always be more cautious to your comfort level.
> * If you show symptoms or come in contact with someone who tests positive quarantine for two weeks.
Wouldn't that apply to boostered people as well, since they catch and spread Omicron at similar rates?
But then, how realistic is it to quarantine for two weeks if almost everyone was in contact with someone who tested positive?
And for added difficulty: the rapid tests have really high false-negative rates for Omicron. I had 6 negative RTs (two manufacturers) after symptoms before my positive PCR test.
I know a few people who test negative on PCR tests but have identical symptoms due to a flu. Given the insane rate of omicron I wouldn't assume all these tests were wrong if one of them now tests positive..
The Center for COVID Control expanded so rapidly that it became unable to keep up with the thousands of tests sent its way — leading to workers leaving tests in garbage bags, unrefrigerated, around the office and lying to customers about their results, former employees said.
That's a complicated discussion. To keep it short, I think different societies are prone to different institutions being centers of organized crime because organized criminals are rational evaluators of power structures and risk.
There's a difference between "you won't get infected" and "you won't end up in the hospital". The current state of the vaccine is not effective for the former against Omicron. It still remains highly effective for the latter. As a thank you to medical workers who are still overworked, please get vaccinated to reduce the burden on the hospital system.
This is not what they said to us the first 2 times here in Greece. And after so much vaccination we are in the worst condition ever.
Who knows, maybe with the 4th round we may be lucky.
You know when a program you coded doesn't work anymore or only with degraded performance because of an outside api? That's it you need to patch it. stop talking like it's something unbelievable insidious happening we need updated influeca vaccines every year. ffs
Covid-19 vaccines and treatments: we must have raw data, now.
The BMJ supports vaccination policies based on sound evidence. As the global vaccine rollout continues, it cannot be justifiable or in the best interests of patients and the public that we are left to just trust “in the system,” with the distant hope that the underlying data may become available for independent scrutiny at some point in the future. The same applies to treatments for covid-19. Transparency is the key to building trust and an important route to answering people’s legitimate questions about the efficacy and safety of vaccines and treatments and the clinical and public health policies established for their use.
Pharmaceutical companies are reaping vast profits without adequate independent scrutiny of their scientific claims. The purpose of regulators is not to dance to the tune of rich global corporations and enrich them further; it is to protect the health of their populations. We need complete data transparency for all studies, we need it in the public interest, and we need it now.
Peoples concerns and hesitancy surrounding the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals is not born in a vacuum, it comes from years of profiteering at the expense of patients. If there is a stigma and lack of faith surrounding these companies, it is typically due to historical precedent. There is a reason that drug manufacturers are some of the least trusted companies in the world, time and time again they abused their position and this has to be acknowledged. The more transparency that can be achieved with their products, the better.
> You know when a program you coded doesn't work anymore or only with degraded performance because of an outside api? That's it you need to patch it. stop talking like it's something unbelievable insidious happening we need updated influeca vaccines every year. ffs
That's fine, as long as nobody acts like they know how it protects people in the future and tries to force it on people.
The vaccines clearly do protect people by a significant degree, and as we’ve seen they’ve also been highly effective against strains which arose after the initial development. That makes it quite reasonable to expect that vaccinated people will fare better against future variants, and even if you’re a complete sociopath who doesn’t care about the human cost, that means society will be better off with fewer disruptions due to illness and less stress on the medical system.
That's some other goalpost (with regard to mandating vaccinations). Vitamin D clearly does protect people by a significant degree and it is not mandated.
> and even if you’re a complete sociopath who doesn’t care about the human cost
Or on the opposite end of the spectrum, a complete sociopath who does not care about overriding people's personal medical decisions and moves the goalpost over and over in order to achieve that goal as we were able to see in popular media during the pandemic.
> In this large observational population study, we show a significant association between vitamin D deficiency and the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and of severe disease in those infected.
> Whether vitamin D plays a causal role in COVID-19 pathophysiology or just a marker of ill health is not known, and our results should be carefully interpreted, as patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 and with severe COVID-19 had a higher number of comorbidities.
> Further large randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine if vitamin D supplementation can decrease COVID-19 incidence and its severity.
Contrast that with vaccination, which has had large trials and been shown to be highly effective. Continuing to study Vitamin D is clearly a good idea — even if it does turn out just to be a symptom of other problems, that seems potentially useful for early intervention just like BMI — but it's nowhere near as settled a question and as a matter of practicality you have to consider the challenges of something which requires changing daily eating habits relative to periodic vaccination.
I mean yes, the large vaccine trials got all the attention and almost limitless resources, but what have they shown? I just recovered from symptomatic Omicron after being vaccinated and there is no way to tell if the vaccine did even play a role at all. Did it prevent severe disease? There is not much severe disease in my age group and for Omicron in the first place. Since the trials, the public narrative has shifted from herd immunity over reduce transmission to prevent hospitalizations. The current recommendation is to wear masks even when boostered. After all, the vaccines were developed for a strain that is no concern anymore.
For vitamin D on the other hand, we learned long ago that it is associated with better outcomes for infectious and other diseaseses in general and we have all these smaller studies that suggest an association between Covid and vitamin D - even though none of the can compete with the mega trials in terms of vastness of data. At the same time, we know that a large share of people in the Western world is vitamin D deficient. I don't want to move the goalpost too far, but what is a good justification for focussing so many resources on the vaccines and so little on other things that are clearly so promising?
Well we got unlucky with omicron, after already being unlucky with delta. Disease changed but the vaccines are the same - vaxxed people are probably totally immune to the original strain
34 comments
[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 97.9 ms ] threadBut we don't know for how long. And what is strange is that unvaxxed are doing better than double vaxxed.
So what will happen once the booster effects wane? Will it be better or worse than unvaxxed?
But yeah, if you believe that it’s too early and not enough research on the effectiveness of booster shots vs. new variants then you should fall back to recommendations that have been tested for longer.
* Wear masks in areas with poor air circulation or air recirculation.
* Keep a 10ft distance from others.
* Avoid being around other people when not necessary.
* If you show symptoms or come in contact with someone who tests positive quarantine for two weeks.
* Get vaccinated and/or boosted if you haven’t already.
The CDC has been making fairly optimistic recs for the vaccinated but you can always be more cautious to your comfort level.
Wouldn't that apply to boostered people as well, since they catch and spread Omicron at similar rates?
But then, how realistic is it to quarantine for two weeks if almost everyone was in contact with someone who tested positive?
And for added difficulty: the rapid tests have really high false-negative rates for Omicron. I had 6 negative RTs (two manufacturers) after symptoms before my positive PCR test.
Also this person had three RTs within 45 minutes, two positive (manufacturer A) and one negative (manufacturer B).
The Center for COVID Control expanded so rapidly that it became unable to keep up with the thousands of tests sent its way — leading to workers leaving tests in garbage bags, unrefrigerated, around the office and lying to customers about their results, former employees said.
Covid-19 vaccines and treatments: we must have raw data, now.
The BMJ supports vaccination policies based on sound evidence. As the global vaccine rollout continues, it cannot be justifiable or in the best interests of patients and the public that we are left to just trust “in the system,” with the distant hope that the underlying data may become available for independent scrutiny at some point in the future. The same applies to treatments for covid-19. Transparency is the key to building trust and an important route to answering people’s legitimate questions about the efficacy and safety of vaccines and treatments and the clinical and public health policies established for their use.
Pharmaceutical companies are reaping vast profits without adequate independent scrutiny of their scientific claims. The purpose of regulators is not to dance to the tune of rich global corporations and enrich them further; it is to protect the health of their populations. We need complete data transparency for all studies, we need it in the public interest, and we need it now.
That's fine, as long as nobody acts like they know how it protects people in the future and tries to force it on people.
> and even if you’re a complete sociopath who doesn’t care about the human cost
Or on the opposite end of the spectrum, a complete sociopath who does not care about overriding people's personal medical decisions and moves the goalpost over and over in order to achieve that goal as we were able to see in popular media during the pandemic.
Mandates are rare and restricted to things which are well-established scientifically, like the efficacy of vaccination.
> In this large observational population study, we show a significant association between vitamin D deficiency and the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and of severe disease in those infected.
There are many other studies that say the same.
> Whether vitamin D plays a causal role in COVID-19 pathophysiology or just a marker of ill health is not known, and our results should be carefully interpreted, as patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 and with severe COVID-19 had a higher number of comorbidities.
> Further large randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine if vitamin D supplementation can decrease COVID-19 incidence and its severity.
Contrast that with vaccination, which has had large trials and been shown to be highly effective. Continuing to study Vitamin D is clearly a good idea — even if it does turn out just to be a symptom of other problems, that seems potentially useful for early intervention just like BMI — but it's nowhere near as settled a question and as a matter of practicality you have to consider the challenges of something which requires changing daily eating habits relative to periodic vaccination.
For vitamin D on the other hand, we learned long ago that it is associated with better outcomes for infectious and other diseaseses in general and we have all these smaller studies that suggest an association between Covid and vitamin D - even though none of the can compete with the mega trials in terms of vastness of data. At the same time, we know that a large share of people in the Western world is vitamin D deficient. I don't want to move the goalpost too far, but what is a good justification for focussing so many resources on the vaccines and so little on other things that are clearly so promising?