Covid vaccine after having covid

[Montanan]

It is good to see that there is some advancement in therapeutics for COVID-19, to complement the vaccines.

The United States government has agreed to purchase $1.2 billion worth of an experimental COVID-19 treatment from Merck if the drug is approved by regulators, the pharmaceutical company announced Wednesday. This purchase would provide enough medication to fully treat 1.7 million people with the new drug. Molnupiravir, which is currently in Phase 3 clinical trials, is being tested on study participants who have been diagnosed with COVID-19, aren't hospitalized and have one or more risk factors, such as diabetes, obesity or old age, associated with worse outcomes from the disease.
If the 1,850-patient global study shows promising results, meaning it reduces participants' risk of hospitalization or death, Merck plans to apply to the Food and Drug Administration for emergency use authorization in the second half of 2021. The company expects to have enough of the drug available by the end of the year to fully treat 10 million people.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/med...?ocid=msedgntp

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by sagablu

Games? I'm reacting to only what you said, how you impersonalized the death of many and the long-term consequences at other suffer. Perhaps if you had seen the refrigerated trucks outside the hospitals with bodies in them, or listen to a long-term client cry for an hour after both his parents died, perhaps you'd have a different view. These are real people who have loved ones who are dying Iand having long-term consequences. You choose to ignore that to further your point of view. Your implication that I am in any way being led by any propaganda from any source is wrong, without basis, and insulting. I've been in public health for 32 years, I get my information from the same sources that I have since the beginning. Don't care about games people play, since this seems to be a lot of playing here. Facts and a dispassionate review is all I care about. I can only conclude since you have no factual argument to support your position you have to deny the facts based on politics and whatever else You think is happening, sorry just not reality. Be well

You choose to interpret I'm implying that you're influenced by politics.. I am not, taking generaliations personally again.. but many are because of the way the Pandemic and everything around it has been politicised.
There's a reason France has a hesitancy of 45%, Germany is around 37%.. in fact over all only 36% of Europeans consider the Covid vaccines to be safe.
If your leaders diss them then there must be a reason.
As for impersonalising death.. seems the world is getting pretty used to that looking back over the last twenty years.
But I guess in your case this is too close to home.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Montanan

It is good to see that there is some advancement in therapeutics for COVID-19, to complement the vaccines.

...........

And yet, what about this - https://www.mountainhomemag.com/2021...-cracked-covid

As someone downunder where there is almost no community covid transmission and covid deaths are virtually zero these days, we don't see any of this stuff in the day to day media here. Thus I have no way of determining it's veracity.

The posters in this thread seem to fall on either side of the covid divide so help me out here.

Is this Mountain Home article plausible or crackpot or too partisan to be considered factual or something else?

BTW, it is longish article so please read all the way to the end before forming you opinion.

[Montanan]

California Announces It Will Require Masks For Unvaccinated People In Indoor Public Settings And Businesses After June 15

https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID...s%3A%20More%20

The guidance issued Wednesday by the California Department of Public Health says that, beginning June 15, fully-vaccinated people will be able to resume everyday activities without wearing a mask.

Masks will be required for unvaccinated individuals in indoor public settings and businesses. Masks will also be required in some limited situations regardless of vaccination status. Those exceptions include public transit, schools and childcare centers (pending updated CDC guidance), healthcare and long-term care facilities, prisons, and emergency or homeless shelters.

Guidance

For fully vaccinated persons, face coverings are not required outdoors except when attending crowded outdoor events, such as live performances, parades, fairs, festivals, sports events, or other similar settings.

For unvaccinated persons, face coverings are required outdoors any time physical distancing cannot be maintained, including when attending crowded outdoor events, such as live performances, parades, fairs, festivals, sports events, or other similar settings.

In indoor settings outside of one's home, including public transportation, face coverings continue to be required regardless of vaccination status, except as outlined below.

As defined in the CDPH Fully Vaccinated Persons Guidance, fully vaccinated people can*:
Visit, without wearing masks or physical distancing, with other fully vaccinated people in indoor or outdoor settings; and
Visit, without wearing masks or physical distancing, with unvaccinated people (including children) from a single household who are at low risk for severe COVID-19 disease in indoor and outdoor settings

Exemptions:

The following specific settings are exempt from face covering requirements:

Persons in a car alone or solely with members of their own household,
Persons who are working alone in a closed office or room,
Persons who are obtaining a medical or cosmetic service involving the nose or face for which temporary removal of the face covering is necessary to perform the service,
Workers who wear respiratory protection, or
Persons who are specifically exempted from wearing face coverings by other CDPH guidance.

The following individuals are exempt from wearing face coverings at all times:
Persons younger than two years old. Very young children must not wear a face covering because of the risk of suffocation.
Persons with a medical condition, mental health condition, or disability that prevents wearing a face covering. This includes persons with a medical condition for whom wearing a face covering could obstruct breathing or who are unconscious, incapacitated, or otherwise unable to remove a face covering without assistance.*
Persons who are hearing impaired, or communicating with a person who is hearing impaired, where the ability to see the mouth is essential for communication.
Persons for whom wearing a face covering would create a risk to the person related to their work, as determined by local, state, or federal regulators or workplace safety guidelines.

*Note: Persons exempted from wearing a face covering due to a medical condition who are employed in a job involving regular contact with others must wear a non-restrictive alternative, such as a face shield with a drape on the bottom edge, as long as their condition permits it.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

Today another casualty of the vaccine in Germany, man in the 40's died after his Astra shot, was healthy before....

No thank you.

And how many died in Germany today from Covid-19?

Here, I'll help: 107 (June 8th). That's 107 times your cited reason not to take the vaccine.

You seriously can't understand?

[CatNewBee]

So death from a unnecessary vaccine are not so tragic. They died for the greater good as heroes to make vaccinated people feel good? Deplorable collateral damage?

I do understand your point, but I do not agree with it.

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

And how many died in Germany today from Covid-19?

Here, I'll help: 107 (June 8th). That's 107 times your cited reason not to take the vaccine.

You seriously can't understand?

last i checked there was 13,000 deaths and 600,000 or so damages caused by corona vaccines in EU in lat 5 mths.

Why our leading experts do not use vaccines that cause smaller/none side effects, like chinese or russian?

To me looks like they are causing with their behaviour preventable deaths and damages which is no good. Maybe even criminal.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

last i checked there was 13,000 deaths and 600,000 or so damages caused by corona vaccines in EU in lat 5 mths.

Why our leading experts do not use vaccines that cause smaller/none side effects, like chinese or russian?

To me looks like they are causing with their behaviour preventable deaths and damages which is no good. Maybe even criminal.

I am interested to know the source material for these numbers, can you provide a link or information about where to look for this data?

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

last i checked there was 13,000 deaths and 600,000 or so damages caused by corona vaccines in EU in lat 5 mths.

Why our leading experts do not use vaccines that cause smaller/none side effects, like chinese or russian?

To me looks like they are causing with their behaviour preventable deaths and damages which is no good. Maybe even criminal.

FYI:

Efficacy of Chinese vaccines is “not high”—officials back 3rd dose
Protection wanes by 6 months; experts call for high-risk people to get 3rd dose.

Officials in Beijing are reportedly planning to roll out third doses of China’s COVID-19 vaccines. These shots have long been dogged by doubts of their efficacy.

According to a report by The Washington Post, health experts in China say that protection from the vaccines may not last after six months and that people who are at high risk of COVID-19 should get a third dose. Now, state-run media outlets suggest Beijing is on board with the suggestion and is preparing to offer the third doses.

Last week, both the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain said they would offer third doses of China’s Sinopharm vaccine to try to boost protection. UAE is offering the extra shots to anyone who was vaccinated six or more months ago. Bahrain is offering third doses to high-risk groups.

Sinopharm’s COVID-19 vaccine as well as China’s Sinovac vaccine are made with whole, inactivated coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Inactivated virus vaccines have the advantage of being relatively easy to make. But, they come with the potential drawback of providing weaker protection than more targeted vaccine approaches, such as the mRNA-based vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna), which take aim at just one particular key element of the virus: the spike protein.

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I am interested to know the source material for these numbers, can you provide a link or information about where to look for this data?

official EU corona site where all stats are. not on front page though. you ll have to do the digging. sorry, cant find link. Apparently 300k serious damages. I know this things are extremely rare but anyway.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

official EU corona site where all stats are. not on front page though. you ll have to do the digging. sorry, cant find link. Apparently 300k serious damages. I know this things are extremely rare but anyway.

Yeah, well I'm not so sure they are as rare as they would like us to think. Either that or my friendship group is full of the unlucky people - possible I suppose.

I don't have a wide circle of acquaintances but so far out of maybe 20 (max) people I know who have had the first shot of the AZ vaccine in the previous month, two have collapsed within 18 hours (after severe shaking episodes), one has lost his hearing within 24 hours (slowly coming back) and one is in hospitable with the "rare" blood clotting. All are aged between 65 and 85.

Maybe this is considered normal (??)

Myself, I am lucky with only an hour of extreme shaking and feeling like a bad hangover for a day or so.

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Yeah, well I'm not so sure they are as rare as they would like us to think. Either that or my friendship group is full of the unlucky people - possible I suppose.

I don't have a wide circle of acquaintances but so far out of maybe 20 (max) people I know who have had the first shot of the AZ vaccine in the previous month, two have collapsed within 18 hours (after severe shaking episodes), one has lost his hearing within 24 hours (slowly coming back) and one is in hospitable with the "rare" blood clotting. All are aged between 65 and 85.

Maybe this is considered normal (??)

Myself, I am lucky with only an hour of extreme shaking and feeling like a bad hangover for a day or so.

You are lucky as there was no permanent damage or worse among people you know

Lets hope they will improve vaccine formulae for the future needs. management of the whole thing seem to be driven by bunch of dilettantes.

[GordMay]

Prolonged Brain Dysfunction In COVID-19 Survivors: A Pandemic In Its Own Right?
One in three survivors of COVID-19, those more commonly referred to as COVID-19 long-haulers, suffered from neurologic or psychiatric disability six months after infection, a recent landmark study [1] of more than 200,000 post-COVID-19 patients showed.
More about ➥ https://theconversation.com/prolonge...n-right-158743

The Study:
[1] “6-month neurological and psychiatric outcomes in 236379 survivors of COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records” ~ by Maxime Taquet, et al
“... In summary, the present data show that COVID-19 is followed by significant rates of neurological and psychiatric diagnoses over the subsequent 6 months. Services need to be configured, and resourced, to deal with this anticipated need.”
➥ https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...084-5/fulltext
➥ https://www.thelancet.com/action/sho...2821%2900084-5


See also:
NIH launches new initiative to study “Long COVID”
➥ https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we...udy-long-covid

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

So death from a unnecessary vaccine are not so tragic. They died for the greater good as heroes to make vaccinated people feel good? Deplorable collateral damage?

I do understand your point, but I do not agree with it.

Of course not. Don't be insulting. The point is, if you are basing your decision based on science, logic, or even basic risk assessment, the choice should be obvious.

On what basis do you decide that 1 death is better than 107? Please explain your ethical thinking here. This might illuminate our fundamental misunderstanding of each other.

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

official EU corona site where all stats are. not on front page though. you ll have to do the digging. sorry, cant find link. Apparently 300k serious damages. I know this things are extremely rare but anyway.

Are you talking about the database listing the number of adverse reactions? These are self-reported (so not critically assessed), and the vast majority do not result in "serious damages." An adverse reaction could be anything from a slightly larger rash around the injection site, to serious anaphylactic shock.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Is this Mountain Home article plausible or crackpot or too partisan to be considered factual or something else?

BTW, it is longish article so please read all the way to the end before forming you opinion.

The majority of US pro-ivermectin articles seem to be spun from the same origin story - FLCCC and Drs Marik and Kory.

It sounds... miraculous. Yet, in formal trials, ivermectin has apparently not offered significant improvement in outcomes, and also has its own drawbacks, hence it hasn't been recommended widely.

Why is this? This is where its proponents yell "conspiracy" - that effective and cheap treatments are being blocked by Big Pharma so that they can make piles of money from vaccines.

It's hard to make sense from all the noise on both sides, but here is my take, based on all that I've read to date.

1. The majority of COVID patients recover regardless of the treatment, so it's hard to pin down whether any specific regimen makes the difference between life and death. To paraphrase one article: if you give every COVID patient lime Jello daily, and the majority recover... is lime Jello an effective treatment for COVID?
2. Especially at the start of the pandemic, doctors were trying everything, and often in combinations. If there's an apparent difference, how do you decide what made the difference? One doctor told me that initially using conventional settings on intubated COVID patients had poor outcomes; it took a while to figure out the most effective settings. So... improvements in outcomes have come from many corners; no single silver bullet has emerged.
3. If ivermectin really was a miracle cure... we'd know by now. As the poorer countries wait for vaccines, they're going to be desperately trying anything and everything - especially such an inexpensive and widely available drug, and no "Big Pharma" would be able to deter them. And it would be obvious if such a drug was making a dramatic improvement.
4. I don't see the FLCCC sending doctors into the poorest and hardest-hit countries, and being hailed as heroes for stopping the tide of COVID deaths.

So, that's this layman's take. Maybe I'm just too naive to see the conspiracy angle.