Will you get vaccinated?

I personally know three people who have died from COVID but none of the three was in great health to begin with.

One I served with, he was a disabled vet with serious back issues, was overweight, and slept with a CPAP.

Another I knew from my strength sport days, he was overweight and had heart issues. He barely survived a widowmaker a few years ago.

The third was on death's door three times before due to serious motorcycle accidents and had a slew of health issues because of it.

All three had serious underlying issues before getting sick.

[QUOTE=fishnbrah;1654548493]Knew A few people hospitalized or
knew 40 people who died from covid. Big difference. He’s full of ****, doubt he knows 40 people total irl. You vaxcels love your lies though[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1654548983]While there is no doubt that covid is a real thing I find it very hard to believe that 40 people in your network died in the last year or so and let alone directly from covid.[/QUOTE]



Considering that our division in the company I work for and manage, is over 300 people alone (not including field agents), and not including my personal network.. yes that number is not just feasible, but low given the danger of Covid. If you think that my social circle is anomalous... then you need to get out more and spend less time on the internet SRS











If refusing to accept reality helps you sleep at night, that's your prerogative. But it doesn't change reality and empirical science. I'd make a snide remark.. but I did that already in the past and one of those people ended up passing away from Covid complications, so no-one "won" in the end. I can tell neither of you have truly experienced loss from this virus, because when you do it will humble your tone and demeanor very quick... even the most staunch deniers and anti-vaxx nuts that I know eventually got humbled in the end, and so will you both. I wish you both the best of luck and health moving forward SRS

[QUOTE=OutdoorsBrah;1654635843]Considering that our division in the company I work for and manage, is over 300 people alone (not including field agents), and not including my personal network.. yes that number is not just feasible, but low given the danger of Covid. If you think that my social circle is anomalous... then you need to get out more and spend less time on the internet SRS











If refusing to accept reality helps you sleep at night, that's your prerogative. But it doesn't change reality and empirical science. I'd make a snide remark.. but I did that already in the past and one of those people ended up passing away from Covid complications, so no-one "won" in the end. I can tell neither of you have truly experienced loss from this virus, because when you do it will humble your tone and demeanor very quick... even the most staunch deniers and anti-vaxx nuts that I know eventually got humbled in the end, and so will you both. I wish you both the best of luck and health moving forward SRS[/QUOTE]

Just finished my 3rd bout with Covid and I remain unvaccinated with zero intention of ever getting a Covid fakeccine. I also know several unvaccinated people personally who have died from Covid.

When I get sick I stay home from work so that I don't infect others.
What do the vaccinated do when they get sick?
They cough and sneeze all over the place while they pontificate on the effectiveness of the fraudccine.

[QUOTE=BK909;1654636553]Just finished my 3rd bout with Covid and I remain unvaccinated with zero intention of ever getting a Covid fakeccine. I also know several unvaccinated people personally who have died from Covid.

[/QUOTE]

I don't think this is the own you think it is.

[QUOTE=Jtbny;1654644553]I don't think this is the own you think it is.[/QUOTE]
I'm too grown for own.
Freedom > Everything
There are far worse things than death but some people will do and say anything for more time.

[QUOTE=BK909;1654644753]I'm too grown for own.
Freedom > Everything
There are far worse things than death but some people will do and say anything for more time.[/QUOTE]

Um ya...me. But hey I'm all for the freedom of you and your unvaxxed crew to do whatever. Seems to be working...

[QUOTE=Jtbny;1654644923]Um ya...me. But hey I'm all for the freedom of you and your unvaxxed crew to do whatever. Seems to be working...[/QUOTE]

It's not working too well for the high blood pressure, diabetic, 25 years of obesity croud but the rest of us are doing just fine but best of luck on your lifetime boosters.

[QUOTE=GrouchyUSMC;1654634953][img]https://forums.somd.com/attachments/269782233_10159456421024342_8770801241149445041_n-png.161442/[/img][/QUOTE]

That poster was claiming I said that, to which I was correcting. I am aware the sentiment has been had by others.

[QUOTE=BK909;1654645183]It's not working too well for the high blood pressure, diabetic, 25 years of obesity croud but the rest of us are doing just fine but best of luck on your lifetime boosters.[/QUOTE]

I am glad you wish him luck with the lifetime of boosters. Curious as to what you perceive as the increased risks of the lifetime of boosters in comparison to catching Covid at least once a year?

[QUOTE=BK909;1654645183]It's not working too well for the high blood pressure, diabetic, 25 years of obesity croud but the rest of us are doing just fine but best of luck on your lifetime boosters.[/QUOTE]

Crowd***

Again not the own I think you think this is...

Guess I could just get Covid over and over, while watching people in my echo chamber own those libs screaming freedom from their death beds. Choices, choices...

The last time I took something "needed" for my health from the government, I hallucinated and was sleep walking. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[QUOTE=mgftp;1654645283]That poster was claiming I said that, to which I was correcting. I am aware the sentiment has been had by others.



I am glad you wish him luck with the lifetime of boosters. Curious as to what you perceive as the increased risks of the lifetime of boosters in comparison to catching Covid at least once a year?[/QUOTE]

You know what people forget what was mentioned when this all began?
331 million people in the USA and only 1 million beds when i last checked the AHA numbers.
Perhaps preventing hospitalization was the goal all along?

[QUOTE=BK909;1654644753]
Freedom > Everything[/QUOTE]

My freedom has not been impacted.

[QUOTE=BK909;1654644753]There are far worse things than death [/QUOTE]

For some this is true, for the vast majority it is not


[QUOTE=BK909;1654644753] some people will do and anything for more time.[/QUOTE]

I am proud to be in this camp, I exercise, eat right and do what I can to increase my longevity. I am out in Nature almost daily, be it fishing, hunting, hiking, skiing, snowshoeing etc....

I would do a lot to get an extra day or longer of this, I am too busy living and not in a hurry to crawl in a hole for a dirt nap and feed the worms.

[img]https://i.imgur.com/cfzmZHs.png[/img]

[QUOTE=mtpockets;1654659863][img]https://i.imgur.com/cfzmZHs.png[/img][/QUOTE]

It is a fun game when out; is she hot or not,lol?

re: "BK909: "some people will do and anything for more time."

[QUOTE=mtpockets;1654659383]... I am proud to be in this camp...[/QUOTE]

I don't think BK meant it in that way. Most people are terrified of dying and the American hospital system can eat a lifetimes' savings by extending a dying persons' life an extra few weeks.

[QUOTE=mtpockets;1654659383]... I am proud to be in this camp, I exercise, eat right and do what I can to increase my longevity. I am out in Nature almost daily, be it fishing, hunting, hiking, skiing, snowshoeing etc... [/QUOTE] With that approach, even if you live not one minute longer, the life you did live was better quality. Either way you win.

I feel like the covid narrative and power grab is finally ending?

UK announced they are no longer allowing mandates or masks anymore and encouraging returning to work etc.

Current CEO is dispersing information as if it were new info about omicron, info most of us have had weeks ago about how mild the symptoms are. Is this finally the end of the clown world and shenanigans?

[QUOTE=asbrewerpro;1654646843]The last time I took something "needed" for my health from the government, I hallucinated[/QUOTE]

Fringe benefit. Don't whine.

[QUOTE=eomrat;1654663303]Fringe benefit. Don't whine.[/QUOTE]

Lol, fair enough

[img]https://i.imgur.com/VaDsKmt.jpg?1[/img]

[QUOTE=_zman;1654663073]I feel like the covid narrative and power grab is finally ending?

UK announced they are no longer allowing mandates or masks anymore and encouraging returning to work etc.

Current CEO is dispersing information as if it were new info about omicron, info most of us have had weeks ago about how mild the symptoms are. Is this finally the end of the clown world and shenanigans?[/QUOTE]

I think so unless another deadlu varient arises.

[QUOTE=mgftp;1654664563]I think so unless another deadlu varient arises.[/QUOTE]

I thought i was done in May of 2021 lol, i walked around mask free without a care in the world....fool me once.....:)

[QUOTE=x-trainer ben;1654672153]I thought i was done in May of 2021 lol, i walked around mask free without a care in the world....fool me once.....:)[/QUOTE]

Exactly. I mean listen I try to be optimistic, I hope it's all winding down, future varienrs are less and less deadly, etc, etc..., But we know it can go the other way quickly, unfortunately.

It's just plain crazy here right now

[IMG]https://i.ibb.co/bK5vKJn/Screenshot-from-2022-01-20-15-25-48.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=mgftp;1654664563]I think so unless another deadlu varient arises.[/QUOTE]

Which is certainly possible. This virus is still generating a great deal of genetic variation. I won’t go as far as saying that it’s likely, but I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a more virulent and exploitative variant arise in the next 1-2 years. Keeping up with vaccination can help minimize that risk.

My guess is we’re done however the virus scares accomplished a lot for certain politicians and drug companies that I’d imagine that they’re going to invent a new strain

[img]https://i.imgur.com/DC6gBRO.jpg?1[/img]

[QUOTE=Reliance012;1654690423]Which is certainly possible. This virus is still generating a great deal of genetic variation. I won’t go as far as saying that it’s likely, but I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a more virulent and exploitative variant arise in the next 1-2 years. Keeping up with vaccination can help minimize that risk.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, because all these “jabs” and boosters are doing such a great job slowing the spread right now…Everyone should just get an IV drip of whatever Pfizer says we should inject to save gram gram, right? LOL.

[img]https://i.imgur.com/aFtxLCi.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1654775623]Yeah, because all these “jabs” and boosters are doing such a great job slowing the spread right now…Everyone should just get an IV drip of whatever Pfizer says we should inject to save gram gram, right? LOL.[/QUOTE]

They’re probably still having some effect on transmission, admittedly less than for previous variants.

The vaccines may reduce the risk of a virulent variant in other ways, too. Reducing overall replication within the host limits the generation of genetic diversity. Inducing an immune response and protection in tissues of the LRT selects against variants with tropism for these cells.

[QUOTE=Reliance012;1654781953]They’re probably still having some effect on transmission, admittedly less than for previous variants.

The vaccines may reduce the risk of a virulent variant in other ways, too. Reducing overall replication within the host limits the generation of genetic diversity. Inducing an immune response and protection in tissues of the LRT selects against variants with tropism for these cells.[/QUOTE]

Sure theoretically, just as a leaky vaccine can also lead to a more virulent strain because a random mutation finds a niche that it can exploit. Given the transmission rate, it’s pretty safe to say the vaccines are doing very little if anything to reduce transmission. Our positivity rate was nearly 20% a couple weeks ago, declining now. Deaths and hospitalizations remain elevated but declining. In my occupational setting, there were times when 80-90% of cases were in vaccinated people. I’m not even sure what our vaccination rate is officially, but I can’t imagine it’s over 60%. I think some people are just more inclined to testing frequently, as a majority of our cases in people are very mild and many asymptomatic.

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1654786233]Sure theoretically, just as a leaky vaccine can also lead to a more virulent strain because a random mutation finds a niche that it can exploit. Given the transmission rate, it’s pretty safe to say the vaccines are doing very little if anything to reduce transmission. Our positivity rate was nearly 20% a couple weeks ago, declining now. Deaths and hospitalizations remain elevated but declining. In my occupational setting, there were times when 80-90% of cases were in vaccinated people. I’m not even sure what our vaccination rate is officially, but I can’t imagine it’s over 60%. I think some people are just more inclined to testing frequently, as a majority of our cases in people are very mild and many asymptomatic.[/QUOTE]

Not really how it works for leaky vaccines. I’m intimately familiar with Read’s work. He actually came out and gave an interview because his work was being misconstrued. Ironically, the very argument that leaky vaccines can select for higher virulence is dependent on high effectiveness against severe disease outcomes.

Theoretical doesn’t mean the insight isn’t valuable. If our health officials had a better understanding of the principles of natural selection, we may have avoided the confusing messages being delivered to the public.

[QUOTE=Reliance012;1654794373]Not really how it works for leaky vaccines. I’m intimately familiar with Read’s work. He actually came out and gave an interview because his work was being misconstrued. Ironically, the very argument that leaky vaccines can select for higher virulence is dependent on high effectiveness against severe disease outcomes.

Theoretical doesn’t mean the insight isn’t valuable. If our health officials had a better understanding of the principles of natural selection, we may have avoided the confusing messages being delivered to the public.[/QUOTE]

It is how it works, it’s a fundamental principle of biology. Vaccines are intended to illicit an immune response to an antigen. Since the covid vaccines illicit an immune response specific to the S protein, rather than all of the mechanisms associated with an actual infection, the response is narrower in scope. This allows an immune response with less risk than infection, but an immune response to a specific component of of the virus (S protein). So when you have a large population being infected by a virus, chances are, through natural selection and random chance of genetic changes from transcription errors, it becomes likely to propagate a virus that exploits a niche that allows it to survive in that environment. So now we are not slowing genetic mutations because the vaccines don’t prevent infection or transmission.

I did a study in an applied environmental microbiology class in college where we collected soil samples in grass/dirt parking areas where there was chronic oil contamination from leaking oils. These samples contained large populations of bacteria that metabolized oil. The availability of the oil allowed populations to flourish because these bacteria exploited a niche. While viruses don’t have any metabolic processes, they still exploit niches whether natural or manmade. We’ve effectively selected for a strain that exploits an advantage in that it is not affected by our antibodies to the S protein. This is independent of virulence, omicron could have been more, less, or the same severity of the previous variant. The mutations are random, host environmental factors are not.

Keep taken those boosters though. Surely trying the same thing the didn’t work over and over will work eventually right? It’s science cause fauci and Pfizer said so.

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1654801163]It is how it works, it’s a fundamental principle of biology. Vaccines are intended to illicit an immune response to an antigen. Since the covid vaccines illicit an immune response specific to the S protein, rather than all of the mechanisms associated with an actual infection, the response is narrower in scope. This allows an immune response with less risk than infection, but an immune response to a specific component of of the virus (S protein). So when you have a large population being infected by a virus, chances are, through natural selection and random chance of genetic changes from transcription errors, it becomes likely to propagate a virus that exploits a niche that allows it to survive in that environment. So now we are not slowing genetic mutations because the vaccines don’t prevent infection or transmission.

I did a study in an applied environmental microbiology class in college where we collected soil samples in grass/dirt parking areas where there was chronic oil contamination from leaking oils. These samples contained large populations of bacteria that metabolized oil. The availability of the oil allowed populations to flourish because these bacteria exploited a niche. While viruses don’t have any metabolic processes, they still exploit niches whether natural or manmade. We’ve effectively selected for a strain that exploits an advantage in that it is not affected by our antibodies to the S protein. This is independent of virulence, omicron could have been more, less, or the same severity of the previous variant. The mutations are random, host environmental factors are not.[/QUOTE]

You should’ve taken my course instead. I could’ve conveyed the principle so you actually understood it.

It’s a life history trade off. Higher exploitation brings with it higher within host reproductive success, but curtails onward transmission prospects. When vaccines delay mortality (or reduce disease severity) but permit considerable transmission, they relax the cost of higher within host exploitation. This selects for more harmful variants. These variants can circulate successfully in vaccinated populations causing low disease severity, but will cause severe infections in the unvaccinated. Targeting a specific antigen doesn’t make a vaccine leaky. Recall that our mRNA vaccines were highly effective against infection for the wild type. It is more nuanced than that. It is about how the immune response targets the pathogen in relation to its life cycle in the host. This is why evolutionary biologists have raised concern about certain malaria vaccines that target merozoites but not the gametocytes. Or why targeting a toxin that is a by product of a pathogen’s life cycle will ultimately favor selection for higher toxin production. My PhD advisor was one of the pioneers of this entire field.

[QUOTE=Reliance012;1654802593]You should’ve taken my course instead. I could’ve conveyed the principle so you actually understood it.

It’s a life history trade off. Higher exploitation brings with it higher within host reproductive success, but curtails onward transmission prospects. When vaccines delay mortality (or reduce disease severity) but permit considerable transmission, they relax the cost of higher within host exploitation. This selects for more harmful variants. These variants can circulate successfully in vaccinated populations causing low disease severity, but will cause severe infections in the unvaccinated. Targeting a specific antigen doesn’t make a vaccine leaky. Recall that our mRNA vaccines were highly effective against infection for the wild type. It is more nuanced than that. It is about how the immune response targets the pathogen in relation to its life cycle in the host. This is why evolutionary biologists have raised concern about certain malaria vaccines that target merozoites but not the gametocytes. Or why targeting a toxin that is a by product of a pathogen’s life cycle will ultimately favor selection for higher toxin production. My PhD advisor was one of the pioneers of this entire field.[/QUOTE]

Well I was probably taking these classes when you were learning to ride a tricycle, so I’m sure there have been some updates. That said, I continue to believe when you have a very specific immune target (S protein) you are missing a large part of the “puzzle” with regard to immune response and efficacy. When I was in school the cutting edge stuff was mRNA vaccines, but that metaphorically, using mushrooms as an example would target the stem rather than the cap. This is to say that there is a lot of variation in button mushroom caps for example, but the stems are all nearly identical. If you can develop a vaccine that targets something that is not easily changed in a bacteria or virus, you can avoid the impact that slight mutations have and end up with a vaccine that will continue to work unless significant genetic changes occur in the pathogen. This was intended for influenza viruses because of their ability to h share genetic material with other influenza viruses.

If you think the current vaccines are curtailing onward transmission prospects, I’ve got some bad news…They are completely ineffective from what I’ve been seeing both in regional numbers and in our workplace of 2000 or so.

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1654807963] …They are completely ineffective from what I’ve been seeing both in regional numbers and in our workplace of 2000 or so.[/QUOTE] What's that quote? Repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity? how many more boosters are we looking at? In reality I think we're done. First shot was "Yay! a vaccine" then the second shot was "OK I guess we need to do this". The booster was "wow, again?" I don't think many will take a 4th.

[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1654808903]What's that quote? Repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity? how many more boosters are we looking at? In reality I think we're done. First shot was "Yay! a vaccine" then the second shot was "OK I guess we need to do this". The booster was "wow, again?" I don't think many will take a 4th.[/QUOTE]

If they can’t get everyone once, profits are just as good getting some over and over.

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1654807963]Well I was probably taking these classes when you were learning to ride a tricycle, so I’m sure there have been some updates. That said, I continue to believe when you have a very specific immune target (S protein) you are missing a large part of the “puzzle” with regard to immune response and efficacy. When I was in school the cutting edge stuff was mRNA vaccines, but that metaphorically, using mushrooms as an example would target the stem rather than the cap. This is to say that there is a lot of variation in button mushroom caps for example, but the stems are all nearly identical. If you can develop a vaccine that targets something that is not easily changed in a bacteria or virus, you can avoid the impact that slight mutations have and end up with a vaccine that will continue to work unless significant genetic changes occur in the pathogen. This was intended for influenza viruses because of their ability to h share genetic material with other influenza viruses.

If you think the current vaccines are curtailing onward transmission prospects, I’ve got some bad news…They are completely ineffective from what I’ve been seeing both in regional numbers and in our workplace of 2000 or so.[/QUOTE]

You’re going back and forth between two separate but interconnected topics.
What you’re talking about is targeting conserved regions. In evolutionary biology we can test for positive selection (we literally quantify it), and when we see conserved regions that have undergone very little selective change, it’s a clue that the polypeptide might be a good target for drug or vaccine mechanisms. This has been in the C19 literature since day. But as of now, there is no better option than the spike protein and if there is, I applaud and support the development.

A more robust response doesn’t necessarily stymie evolution. Think of your mushroom analogy in the context of naturally acquired immunity. NAI has failed miserably at driving pathogens to extinction. In fact, I know of no example in history of a circulating human pathogen being driven to extinction from NAI.

[img]https://i.imgur.com/NjHF6BX.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Reliance012;1654823223]You’re going back and forth between two separate but interconnected topics.
What you’re talking about is targeting conserved regions. In evolutionary biology we can test for positive selection (we literally quantify it), and when we see conserved regions that have undergone very little selective change, it’s a clue that the polypeptide might be a good target for drug or vaccine mechanisms. This has been in the C19 literature since day. But as of now, there is no better option than the spike protein and if there is, I applaud and support the development.

A more robust response doesn’t necessarily stymie evolution. Think of your mushroom analogy in the context of naturally acquired immunity. NAI has failed miserably at driving pathogens to extinction. In fact, I know of no example in history of a circulating human pathogen being driven to extinction from NAI.[/QUOTE]

But the vaccine is clearly not working now, so why not just go the NAI route instead of pushing for more useless boosters?

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1654866163]But the vaccine is clearly not working now, so why not just go the NAI route instead of pushing for more useless boosters?[/QUOTE]
That is the next step. New narrative:
Everyone needs to live a healthy lifestyle so we can beat this.

What a concept....

[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1654866823]That is the next step. New narrative:
Everyone needs to live a healthy lifestyle so we can beat this.

What a concept....[/QUOTE]

That’ll never happen. The money is in the medicines. When our work test or vax mandate went into effect I was wondering if it was for “health and safety” why not mandate a healthy body composition say BMI under 30, or you have to walk 5 miles before work (on your own time). Next will probably be mandatory gender reassignment surgeries because I work in a very male dominated industry, need that diversity. Hard to attract females but we can make them! Michael the pipefitter you need to become Michelle the pipefitter within 30 days or be subject to discipline…I swear it wouldn’t surprise me at this point.

[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1654807963]I continue to believe when you have a very specific immune target (S protein) you are missing a large part of the “puzzle” with regard to immune response and efficacy. [/QUOTE]

To some degree, but a fairly small one if those other 28 proteins are hidden inside a sugar coated capsid and only "exposed" inside the hosts cells. In that case they're not particularly useful to the immune system. They may help us target some infected cells if a bit of those proteins wanders off to the wrong place and an active epitope gets displayed on the exterior wall of our cell.

Going after more preserved portions of the spike protein would be an interesting idea, if we had the technology to guide your immune system to the specific epitopes. Sadly, we don't yet. I do know of at least one lab that's working on that, but I am not convinced it will be more effective. Especially with a virus that hides it's epitopes so well.

Omicron is now affecting infants, and some who are co-infected with RSV are winding up in the ICU. I'm sure RSV+COVID isn't the only issue, but there are enough sick babies that one of the children's' hospitals a colleague trained at is having to transport babies to other hospitals if they need to be in the ICU. That's concerning.


Editing to add:
A lot of people are getting "natural" immunity in addition to their vaccines, which is a much safer way for them to acquire it than to avoid the vaccine. Even if the vaccine doesn't completely prevent you from getting sick, it does still mitigate the risks and severity of the illness in most people. The real way that's related to money is in less time lost from productivity.

[QUOTE=Reliance012;1654802593]You should’ve taken my course instead. I could’ve conveyed the principle so you actually understood it.

It’s a life history trade off. Higher exploitation brings with it higher within host reproductive success, but curtails onward transmission prospects. When vaccines delay mortality (or reduce disease severity) but permit considerable transmission, they relax the cost of higher within host exploitation. This selects for more harmful variants. These variants can circulate successfully in vaccinated populations causing low disease severity, but will cause severe infections in the unvaccinated. Targeting a specific antigen doesn’t make a vaccine leaky. Recall that our mRNA vaccines were highly effective against infection for the wild type. It is more nuanced than that. It is about how the immune response targets the pathogen in relation to its life cycle in the host. This is why evolutionary biologists have raised concern about certain malaria vaccines that target merozoites but not the gametocytes. Or why targeting a toxin that is a by product of a pathogen’s life cycle will ultimately favor selection for higher toxin production. My PhD advisor was one of the pioneers of this entire field.[/QUOTE]


I had a very different opinion about all this until I saw the post above. Now my opinion is changed. The snark at the beginning is all I actually read, but from that, I could tell that Reliance is a man of great intellect and very superior to whoever he is arguing with now. Whatever it is that he is going on about is now my new opinion and anyone who disagrees is just not intelligent enough to understand.

[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1654866823]That is the next step. New narrative:
Everyone needs to live a healthy lifestyle so we can beat this.

What a concept....[/QUOTE]

Didn't we know this already when we joined in 2005-6 and tried to get friends and family to join us in the pursuit of health 16 years ago?

[QUOTE=eomrat;1654903233]I had a very different opinion about all this until I saw the post above. Now my opinion is changed. The snark at the beginning is all I actually read, but from that, I could tell that Reliance is a man of great intellect and very superior to whoever he is arguing with now. Whatever it is that he is going on about is now my new opinion and anyone who disagrees is just not intelligent enough to understand.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for your service in interpreting that, and also, thank you for your service if I haven't already said it seriously :)

His is actually a very good post if you read past the first quoted line. No clue where he's studying, but I've found his posts on evolutionary biology and microbiology to be very good. He's described some complicated theories clearly in short posts. That's not easy to do!



Up here in Orange county NC everything is finally melting, which is a gift since one of my pups thinks snow is meant to be eaten. Every time I let him out to pee he pees a bucket's worth then eats a bunch of snow and ice. Means he may have to go out again in 20 minutes, except sometimes we don't realize that in time.

You guys thawed out down there in Fayetteville yet, or did you actually get to skip the snow and ice entirely?

[QUOTE=x-trainer ben;1654904023]Didn't we know this already when we joined in 2005-6 and tried to get friends and family to join us in the pursuit of health 16 years ago?[/QUOTE]Nobody can make money off of healthy people

[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1654906003]Nobody can make money off of healthy people[/QUOTE]

Yeah they can, supplements, natural organic foods, athletic wear and shoes, anything health and fitnesss related.

[QUOTE=eomrat;1654903233]I had a very different opinion about all this until I saw the post above. Now my opinion is changed. The snark at the beginning is all I actually read, but from that, I could tell that Reliance is a man of great intellect and very superior to whoever he is arguing with now. Whatever it is that he is going on about is now my new opinion and anyone who disagrees is just not intelligent enough to understand.[/QUOTE]

I have to say that the overall hubris of the scientific community has given me more pause and concern than anything coming out of the genuine anti-vax crowd.

[QUOTE=JustTheDad;1654901843]To some degree, but a fairly small one if those other 28 proteins are hidden inside a sugar coated capsid and only "exposed" inside the hosts cells. In that case they're not particularly useful to the immune system. They may help us target some infected cells if a bit of those proteins wanders off to the wrong place and an active epitope gets displayed on the exterior wall of our cell.

Going after more preserved portions of the spike protein would be an interesting idea, if we had the technology to guide your immune system to the specific epitopes. Sadly, we don't yet. I do know of at least one lab that's working on that, but I am not convinced it will be more effective. Especially with a virus that hides it's epitopes so well.

Omicron is now affecting infants, and some who are co-infected with RSV are winding up in the ICU. I'm sure RSV+COVID isn't the only issue, but there are enough sick babies that one of the children's' hospitals a colleague trained at is having to transport babies to other hospitals if they need to be in the ICU. That's concerning.


Editing to add:
A lot of people are getting "natural" immunity in addition to their vaccines, which is a much safer way for them to acquire it than to avoid the vaccine. Even if the vaccine doesn't completely prevent you from getting sick, it does still mitigate the risks and severity of the illness in most people. The real way that's related to money is in less time lost from productivity.[/QUOTE]

On spread. Sad to hear about the infants, but RSV is always a pretty significant risk in that demographic. If the case loads are high enough to transfer to other treatment centers that isn't good, but we are also looking at pretty extreme transmission right now in many parts of the country so hopefully that will taper off quickly. A girl I work with was telling me she was at talking to a friend at hospital in IL that was getting requests from as far as Iowa for transferring adult covid patients.

I guess they still haven't worked out what sounded really cool in theory 20 years ago. It seems part of the immune response that is missing from vaccine induced immune response from the covid shots is the cells ability to signal when it is infected to signal macro****es and killer T cells to kill and gobble it all up? Not the most scientific terms, but basically I don't think it can ever be about preventing infection at the cellular level completely, but the entirety of the immune system having a coordinated response to a targeted pathogen. These vaccines being so targeted, as compared to some more historically produced types seem to have a very narrow focus, but I am not an immunologist.

I'm not sure how to quantify how much reduction the vaccines are having on sever cases right now though. It is relatively mild for most (more so than original) and we are still seeing record numbers of hospitalizations while having record high vaccination rates... Again this is expected when positivity rates are so high, 25% in some places, which insane when you think about it. 1 in 4 people tested are testing positive. Reductions to lost productivity are also coming from revised guidance for the 5 day quarantine, and likely helping drive herd immunity as I am sure that is putting more people in circulation who are still contagious. Someone who doesn't have paid sick leave isn't going to be honest about being symptom free to RTW.