Covid: the shape of things to come

[MarcelNL]

@juice Hindsight is always 20:20
I think that betting on one horse caused more of a problem than this hiccup until the side effect was better understood, not sure if I got that right but the data seems to indicate all others than AZ came into play much later effectivley meaning the govt had painted itself in the corner of the room.
Trust in medicines is no different than elsewhere, it comes on foot and goes by horse.

https://www.health.gov.au/initiativ...-19-vaccines/about-rollout/vaccine-agreements

 

[spaceconvoy]

"Helminth [ie worm] infections are among the most common infectious diseases. Bradbury et al. highlight the possible negative interactions between helminth infection and COVID-19 severity in helminth-endemic regions and note that alterations in the gut microbiome associated with helminth infection appear to have systemic immunomodulatory effects. It has also been proposed that helminth co-infection may increase the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19, because the immune system cannot efficiently respond to the virus; in addition, vaccines will be less effective for these patients, but treatment and prevention of helminth infections might reduce the negative effect of COVID-19."
Source:
The New Status of Parasitic Diseases in the COVID-19 Pandemic—Risk Factors or Protective Agents?

So it turns out that Ivermectin probably
does reduce the severity of coronavirus in people with underlying worm infections, estimated to be one half to a quarter of the population in developing countries. In the US, the NIH estimates 5.5 - 7 million people are infected with one of the five most common worms. In fact, the NIH recommends:

"Clinicians should consider STH [ie worm] infection in high-risk populations in decision-making for COVID-19-infected patients."
Source:
Soil-Transmitted Helminths in the USA: a Review of Five Common Parasites and Future Directions for Avenues of Enhanced Epidemiologic Inquiry

Trust the Science!

 

[Jovidah]

So basically.. a horse dewormer can have a beneficial effect if you actually have worms?

 

[spaceconvoy]

I think you mean "human dewormer" or you can just say "dewormer"

 

[MarcelNL]

Formulating a hypothesis is not science, it's where science STARTS, so let's wait a bit until there is science to prove this right or wrong...not science that Ivermectin helps treating worms, that bit has been proven or the stuff would not have been approved for that indication.

 

[Noxion]

I don’t care whether people go to the feed store and buy horse dewormer. And I don’t care if they talk their Dr. into prescribing it in its human form.
My point is that these people are the same people who aren’t getting vaccinated, getting sick and plugging up our health system. And that is putting a lot of stress on people I care about and the medical industry in general.
They’re also the same people who are spreading the virus and allowing it to mutate which is making this planet a lot more dangerous for the rest of us.

Actually, there are drugs that function on the SARS-CoV-2; they’re a refinement of the known anti-viral drugs approach based on “spoiling” the process of viral multiplication inside a living organism by inserting homologues in the newly formed RNA viral strains. The problem is that these drugs are by their own nature teratogenic. In other words, the people screaming “vaccines are poison” are ready to take real poison once their own egoistic “need” mode switches on.


In certain EU states with low level of vaccination the epidemic exploded; there are no free intensive care beds in Slovenia any more and the whole medical system has collapsed. Even those scheduled for emergency cardio operations are being left at home.

The second problem is the viral charge in the population; if it is very high the virus is going to mutate – adapt, so that it can re-infect those resistant (vaccinated or recovered). Therefore; the whole population must be made resistant in a short span of time (vaccinated) and the international travelling strictly controlled.


Now; mandatory vaccination is not really necessary. The mRNA tech (BioNTech, Moderna) is very flexible and the product can be quickly adapted. Also, since it’s not a vaccine, from a tech point of view, it can be used to refresh or remind the immune system on a frequent basis. With a 4 month refresh cycle one can effectively protect himself and leave the anti-vax believers to the deliverance.
The only issue is that the anti-vax mob demands rights on other people’s expenses; to monopolise the hospital care once they need it, pushing others (even oncological patients) out, they demand to be treated for free and to get a paid sick leave and possible disability money from others.
Therefore, the society will have to decide which force is minor; forced vaccination or leaving a large number of the anti-vax population to fend for itself.
The answer is clear: forced vaccination will win for humanitarian reasons.

 

[gregfisk]

The take away here is pretty simple. These people are anti Virology, anti science, anti vaccines and anti hospital’s UNTIL they need help. Then it’s right back to (it’s all about me.) And still, many of them don’t respect the Dr’s, nurses and pharmacists who are trying to save their lives. I’m just going to leave it at that. This stuff really pisses me off.

 

[daveb]

Both sides claim to own the "Science". Neither side seems to.

In the real world my company has told us that Vax mandates will be enforced and Dec 5 is the magic date. In real terms it means I'll lose more than half my workforce in an environment that is already challenging.

Healthcare as we know it is about to go down the tubes - and nothing will be accomplished.

 

[juice]

Healthcare as we know it is about to go down the tubes - and nothing will be accomplished.

That's pretty dire, given how buggered the healthcare system is in the US already...

 

[WildBoar]

Both sides claim to own the "Science". Neither side seems to.

In the real world my company has told us that Vax mandates will be enforced and Dec 5 is the magic date. In real terms it means I'll lose more than half my workforce in an environment that is already challenging.

Healthcare as we know it is about to go down the tubes - and nothing will be accomplished.

It's supposed to be coming for a lot of federal government agencies, as well as the contractors that work with/ for them. But in typical fashion it's not yet fully defined.

 

[MarcelNL]

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/18/europe/germany-covid-merkel-record-intl/index.html
Just see what impact a difference in vax rates has, Portugal and Spain were amongst the hardest hit in previous waves and have a very high vax rate as result...do we need more science than those statistics and the current infection rates to do the math predicting ICU/hospital utilization of COVID patients?

Despite what many seem to think the outlook did not change and it will not, it's not a matter if you get it, but when.
The best thing one can do is to do is to prepare yourself by ; either total self isolation (whether imposed by Govt or self imposed), or get vaccinated and stay 'boostered up' as we learn more.

 

[Luftmensch]

Therefore, the society will have to decide which force is minor; forced vaccination or leaving a large number of the anti-vax population to fend for itself.
The answer is clear: forced vaccination will win for humanitarian reasons.

Depends what you mean. Truly forced vaccinations will be non-existent - or rare at best.

Instead you will see Governments use a range of incentives to increase vaccine uptake... whether it is limiting the freedoms of the unvaccinated... or vaccine mandates to work in the public sector & contracting.... giving legal certainty to private organisations to do the same (e.g. universities). The proposition "get vaccinated or lose my job/privileges" seems harsh but it is still a choice.

In Singapore, unvaccinated people will have to pay their own medical bills.

If emergency care was flooded with cases... If the population had been given enough reasonable opportunity to get vaccinated, I would consider a triage policy where unvaccinated patients were deprioritised. In other words, effectively treat a lack of vaccination as a comorbidity.


On doing the right thing** for humanitarian reasons... perhaps you are an optimist and I am a pessimist. The past couple of decades seems littered with "the free world" making poor geopolitical and humanitarian choices. Modern politics has become such an occupation (not a a service/duty) that even the best governments are preoccupied with ensuring their own polling and electoral success.

(**I do not believe forced vaccination is the right thing at all. However I am in full support of incentive structures that makes life difficult for the unvaccinated)

 

[Keith Sinclair]

First Moderna shot nothing

Second Moderna sore arm slight chills fine next
day.

Third Moderna booster shot this week. Only half dose, sore arm, nausea, chills, headache all following day. I never get headaches.

Thinking if more covid shots in the future try different vaccine.

 

[Barmoley]

My brother did three pfixer shots was also hit hardest after the third, pretty sick for 2 days. My parents felt the worst also after moderna booster, but not too bad. Seems that different vaccine booster might not help, just not known how you will react. Some people barely notice some get really sick.

 

[gregfisk]

I just had my Pfizer booster a few days ago and it hit me pretty damn hard. Bad joint pain and a terrible headache and fever. Lasted 2.5 days, exactly the same as my second shot several months ago. While I truly hate getting vaccinated I know from several people I know that I’m way better off getting the vaccination. I know 2 people now who have been fully vaccinated and still got Covid. Both of them originally had gotten J&J and hadn’t gotten their booster yet. They were also both sick for about two weeks but not hospitalized. I’m not trying to paint a picture here since obviously this is only 2 people I happen to know. What I do believe though is if these people hadn’t been vaccinated in the first place that they probably would have been hospitalized or worse. My only wish is that more people get vaccinated so that we slow down the spread and make the world a safer place.

 

[Keith Sinclair]

Was In Singapore in 1990. Was impressed, many different ethnic groups & some mixed race like Hawaii. Strict laws are designed to favor the group with a healthy dose of capitalism in one of greatest seaports in the world. Clean, great food.

Made me want to know Singapore history from Portuguese, Dutch, & English. When they gained
Independence from colonial rule was conservative anti communist. When Chinese saw how Singapore was successful they sent people to study the model of government. They
began to change China

Singapore has been threatened much since it was first established. It has quite a history. Muslim extremist from Indonesia wanted to take over small City State.

They asked Israel to teach their small military in
the ways of Intelligence & elite special forces.

 

[Luftmensch]

not so sure it was stupid to pause using AZ,

Yeah it's a difficult position to be in. You want to be prudent because even if the side-effects being brought up are minimal or even completely absent, it might severely undermine vaccine acceptance.

Context counts for a lot.

They delivered the warning in a truly stupid fashion and caused all sorts of problems down here with people not getting injected as a result, putting us WAY behind schedule.

I am mixed on this. There is so much that could have been done better. Starting with a diverse range of vaccine contracts. I also agree Government messaging was poor.

I dont want to make excuses for the Government... but I think uptake was also hindered by the initial success and myth of 'fortress Australia'. You might reasonably make the argument that the risk of AZ is too high at a population level, if you have low COVID circulation. Wait until the 'safer' vaccine becomes available.

We were doing well... until... we weren't (Delta).

You can see the fingerprint of that experience now. The states that had a major Delta wave have higher vaccine rates than states that didnt. Initially this could be explained by supply issues. Not any more. Supply is sufficient. The reason WA has a lower vaccine rate isn't because of Pfizer or AZ. It is more likely because life has been relatively normal for them. They probably feel less urgency to roll up their sleeves.

During the wave in Sydney, you practically had to kill a person to get a booking... People wanted their vaccination yesterday.

 

[Matus]

Both my mom and mother in law already got their booster shots with no real side effects (both got 3x Pfizer if I am not mistaken). Some younger colleagues of mine were off the work for a few days after the first some, some after the second. Everyone reacts differently and it is hard to predict.

As was already mentioned - it is an interesting approach to force people who are eligible to be vaccinated but decide not to do so to be forced to pay their hospital bills if they end up in care with Covid. I am not saying it is not a gray area, but less gray then forced vaccination from my perspective. On the other hand - whether some can take such a step will depend on existing legislation, or it may require new laws to open that option. I am curios whether such a regulation will be really implemented. ICU beds are VERY expensive and paying for one from your own pocket for a few weeks could quickly endanger financial existence of a given person, so such decisions need to be considered very carefully.

 

[Michi]

ICU beds are VERY expensive and paying for one from your own pocket for a few weeks could quickly endanger financial existence of a given person, so such decisions need to be considered very carefully.

That is a real problem with this idea. The people who end up having to pay for their own treatment most likely won't be able to afford it. So then, if the state tries to enforce the debt, they just end up adding to the pile of social welfare cases because someone ends up having to declare bankruptcy. Long term, that's more costly than treating people so they can get back to work and not end up living on welfare.

 

[MarcelNL]

Austria has announced mandatory vaccination starting Feb 2022, let's see if they can find the legal basis to really go that (IMO slippery) road...

Paying for hospital care for self inflicted damage IMO is a no go, unless there is a serious and broad discussion in society about the ethics of being responsible for the effects of pretty much ALL self inflicted damage... ICU/hospital capacity currently accounts for all kinds of 'objectively' stupid behaviour we used to have sufficient capacity for, hospital care is not designed for specific groups but it developed in a more or less organic way. Do I get to pay the hospital bill when I crash my car in Germany doing 230km/h? Does a long term smoker get to pay for the cancer surgery, do the morbidly obese pay for bariatric surgery, does someone who dropped an XTC pill too many on a festival pay? Not really, simply because those examples are already 'included in the mix', whereas Covid patients (vaccinated and non-vaccinated, in Belgium the mix on ICU is 50-50) are the 'new kid on the ICU block'.

I do feel there ought to be a way to urge non vaxxers to re-consider, but a penalty after the fact IME is the worst method to enthusiasmate people to do anything, let alone make them do some open minded thinking.
Mandatory vaccination for me is out of the question as much as mandatory sterilization of certain groups, or doing medical experiments without informed consent.

What I do not see, not in in any country that I'm aware of, is a disscusion how we expect this virus to develop over time and what the implications on hospital care are... I do hear politicians griping (and the general public too) how it's a shame that ICU capacity has not been increased over the last 2 years, well hello...that takes a sort of landslide to make it happen at the ususal pay rate and work load and more importantly ; even if you can find the workforce it takes at least 8-10 years to meaningfully increase the highly skilled staff needed in hospitals, unless cloning and implanting skills and knowledge becomes a real option anytime soon.

From my perspective it's better to start an all out effort to reach all to date non vaccinated people by a.o, informing them, do whatever it takes . f.e. do a TV program on 'a day in ICU' or whatever to show the real deal. Bottom line is, we'll never reach 100% vax rates but we should make an effort to make the number as low as possible, yet our care systems will need to be adapted to deal with Covid until it is no longer, something I hear experts across the board say is an unlikely thing to happen.

Mandatory regular testing (followed by isolation once positive) seems a more effective route, test the heck out of us all to minimize the risk of infecting others. Vaccination helps minimizing the risk of transmission but the experts agree that with the delta variant herd immunity is no longer feasible...so vaccination really is to protect yourself, and it helps spreading the virus to some extent, but there is not much of a whopping reason to exclude the unvaccinated from anything IMO...test the heck out of EVERYONE, and FU on positive cases making reasonably sure they isolate themselves until no longer infectious.

 

[Luftmensch]

I am curios whether such a regulation will be really implemented. ICU beds are VERY expensive and paying for one from your own pocket for a few weeks could quickly endanger financial existence of a given person, so such decisions need to be considered very carefully.

That is a real problem with this idea. The people who end up having to pay for their own treatment most likely won't be able to afford it.

Paying for hospital care for self inflicted damage IMO is a no go, unless there is a serious and broad discussion in society about the ethics of being responsible for the effects of pretty much ALL self inflicted damage

Great points. I agree.

I often wonder if the point of these announcements.... is the announcement. Perhaps the authorities are less concerned about actually enforcing them than sending a signal to the population that there are positive or negative incentives to get vaccinated. Of course if you admit the announcement are primarily just motivational tool... then the announcement loses any intended effect....

... it must be very frustrating to be a public health official fighting stubborn vaccination uptake. How do you motivate the remaining population to participate if they have been given ample opportunity? I certainly don't have any answers... but it is interesting seeing how different jurisdictions are approaching the problem.

 

[Michi]

Perhaps the authorities are less concerned about actually enforcing them than sending a signal to the population that there are positive or negative incentives to get vaccinated.

Maybe in Singapore. In Australia, not a chance. Any idea of legislating that people who are not vaccinated and get Covid have to pay for their own treatment will result in losing the next election, guaranteed.

But there are other levers that can be pulled. Such as not allowing people without double vaccination into restaurants and the like.

After all of Australia's initial monumental stuff-ups regarding vaccination, it now looks like we'll end up being one of the most vaccinated countries in the world. Good thing, too. Just look at what's currently going on in Austria and Germany. Not pretty

... it must be very frustrating to be a public health official fighting stubborn vaccination uptake.

I'd absolutely hate to have that job. These people have literally been working their guts out to stop the population from getting decimated by the virus. And, for all their efforts, they get death threats. Talk about a thankless job…

 

[MarcelNL]

I just hope authorities do not make themselves guilty of 'sending signals' in the form of loudly shouting nonsense, IMO that is the best way to alienate more people than we're already dealing with.

I just read the results from a survey amongst 2500 non vaccinated respondees, and it shows that (in NL) about 10% will not ever get vaccinated, whereas approx 30% could be convinced to get vaccinated.

Frustrating and challenging as it might be, we will have to engage that group whatever size it has, the 30% or so, in order to try take away the lack of trust. Do not forget that for the last 30-40 years Pharma did not get a good rep in the press, some of that is self inflicted damage but there has much nonsense in the news...undoing that damage will take time, and lots of it.

Meanwhile we also need to embrace the fact that Covid is not going anywhere anytime soon and finally START taking action in order to have a hope of ever coming to grips with Covid as a new disease in our society.

 

[riba]

A bit of vaccinated attitude. NSFW, though it depends on your workplace.

 

[Keith Sinclair]

That is a real problem with this idea. The people who end up having to pay for their own treatment most likely won't be able to afford it. So then, if the state tries to enforce the debt, they just end up adding to the pile of social welfare cases because someone ends up having to declare bankruptcy. Long term, that's more costly than treating people so they can get back to work and not end up living on welfare.

The article posted was Singapore. Of coarse what they do would never work elsewhere. For the very reasons you stated. Here most all hospitalized with no vaccine could not afford it even one day.

Also they already have one of highest vaccine rates around 85%. It's a version of if you don't get vaccine to make our very high density City State safer you will pay. If you get your shots we will pay.

 

[juice]

That is a real problem with this idea. The people who end up having to pay for their own treatment most likely won't be able to afford it. So then, if the state tries to enforce the debt, they just end up adding to the pile of social welfare cases because someone ends up having to declare bankruptcy. Long term, that's more costly than treating people so they can get back to work and not end up living on welfare.

Communist

 

[Noxion]

Depends what you mean. Truly forced vaccinations will be non-existent - or rare at best.

Instead...

I didn't elaborate on the "forced", but everything what you've listed is a form of forcing.
The problem with the Western world is that the whole political system is based on activism and short term publicity. Also, a good indicator; at the height of economical and industrial development all these modern Western states accumulated massive debt.
Therefore the forcing will be done through the back door. One just needs a critical mass of activists.
_____
The booster seems to hit hard; same experience as some here listed.
Still, 6 months seem to be too far apart for real protection. Maybe doing boosters after 4 months makes the side effects less pronounced?

 

[MarcelNL]

The side effects are IMO not relevant enough to worry about, they mean that our immune system is getting activated. I recall (vagely) how my last Dipteria/tetanus etc shot felt, or my Hep B vaccinations...they all came with 1 or 2 days of not feeling well.
The optimal period between vaccinations will be different for many individuals, a mean value will be found.

 

[chiffonodd]

That is a real problem with this idea. The people who end up having to pay for their own treatment most likely won't be able to afford it. So then, if the state tries to enforce the debt, they just end up adding to the pile of social welfare cases because someone ends up having to declare bankruptcy. Long term, that's more costly than treating people so they can get back to work and not end up living on welfare.

Sir do you mean to suggest that public policy choices can have unintended consequences??

 

[Luftmensch]

Maybe in Singapore. In Australia, not a chance. Any idea of legislating that people who are not vaccinated and get Covid have to pay for their own treatment will result in losing the next election, guaranteed.

Oh for sure... That would not be politically feasible in Australia. My point isn't so much about any specific policy. I was musing on the nature of Government announcements (positive or negative) as incentive signals.

NSW has been using a mixture of incentives. So long as you don't live in Western Sydney, the Government has largely used the 'carrot' and not the 'stick'. A prime example of this was the "picnic rules" during the Delta wave. Here is a quote from the NSW Chief Health Officer on the picnic rules [ref]:

By then, in September, the weather will be a nice time, and we know that outdoor spaces are less risk. What we’re doing is also incentivising vaccination, because to avail yourself of this, you have to be vaccinated

Emphasis mine. Dont get me wrong... relaxation to the rules are likely to have had some basis in modelling and risk assessment... but they were often tied to the global vaccination rate and applied only to vaccinated individuals. They were also announced well ahead of the targets they were tied to. There was clearly a strategy to send a message that we could enjoy increased freedoms sooner by all getting vaccinated as quickly as possible. It also allowed us to 'open up' relatively gradually.

I can't say the picnic rules specifically influenced anybody I know to get vaccinated. Everybody in my orbit was proactive about vaccination. BUT; I have many social friends who greatly appreciated the picnic rules and used them as soon as they were available. I have one forward looking friend who got vaccinated very early, before the Delta wave, because they correctly predicted a world of increased freedoms for the vaccinated. Before Delta, many good people were complacent and waiting to hear good news about Pfizer supply. My age cohort was also not in the eligible vaccine phase when this all began...

But Australia is a moderate country. NSW (population 8M) now has 94.3% 1st dose and 91.7% 2nd dose. The authorities were largely trying to motivate distracted, busy and complacent people. They were NOT trying to motivate large populations of skeptical people.