It is much rarer, yes. I never stated it as an argument against vaccination. I stated it as a fact that even vaccinated individuals can get, spread and even die from covid. I’m fully vaccinated as are my immediate family but I realize we still are vulnerable to some extent and can also still contribute to spread. It’s ok to say that, it’s the truth. We shouldn’t feel the need to suppress these facts either.
2 Likes
I believe in vaccinations and don’t fight against it. Based on these numbers you just provided from Texas, partial vaccination appears to be as protective as full vaccination.
You have to look at the percentage of all eligible people who were partially vs. fully vaccinated to know if that’s true.
The issue is that it’s incomplete, misleading information. If an unvaccinated person hears, “Even some fully vaccinated people are dying,” they could think, “Then why should I get vaccinated?” They need to be informed of the actual statistics to make an informed decision. And those statistics HAVE been shared, over and over and over and over. Nothing is being surpressed.
3 Likes
I didn’t say whether they were true or not. I don’t know. I was just pointing out that the numbers used from Texas and the way they were used in that statement, then the same would be true for the partially vaccinated.
Personally I would be very happy if those who are opposed would at least get partially vaccinated.
1 Like
When I state that vaccinated individuals can still get, transmit and even die from covid it is seen by some as misleading. The fact is it’s true. Saying it’s misleading essentially is trying to suppress the statement. It’s not misleading, it’s a fact.
Sure that fact could cause some to say why bother getting vaccinated. Ignoring that fact and trying to say it’s misleading also turns some people off.
3 Likes
This will be my last response. It IS misleading to say “some.” If you said, “A very few,” it would be better. I don’t understand why you would want to mislead vaccine reluctant people.
4 Likes
I don’t believe @MarylandJOE is trying to be misleading. What he stated is a fact. You believe it can be stated in a better way. While that may be true, it is a fact.
3 Likes
You’ve mentioned this before. I’d like to know, who exactly is suppressing facts? And if “we” are suppressing facts, why would we do so? It seems to me that if we( whoever “we” are) really wanted to suppress facts, we would stop this vaccination campaign and just let people keep getting sick and dying in the numbers they were before we had widely available vaccines.
Should the message instead be:
“Get vaccinated people. BUT, you can still die, even if you get vaccinated, and it’s possible that you might have an adverse reaction to the vaccine. All the verified data show that a vaccine is your safest option. But forget about those numbers that show you’re more likely to live, be less sick, etc…and just focus on the least likely outcome.”
Is that the correct message “we” should be giving?
There is nothing you or anyone can say that will change the facts as they stand at this moment. I wonder why people bother trying, but there you go. Why emphasize the fact that yes, a few people will die even if fully vaccinated, but ignore that so many more will LIVE?
Opinions will never negate facts. Facts might be added to or revised as new knowledge is acquired, but as of today, the facts as we know them are not opinions.
3 Likes
I think ‘some’ and ‘very few’ are not mutually exclusive. Yes, the latter is more precise, but the former is not incorrect. (‘some’ doe not necessarily denote ‘many’)
2 Likes
I’m answering your question.
I stated a fact and I believe I was basically told that the fact was misleading because I didn’t include a qualifier regarding other facts. That seems like suppression. I’m not sure why I have to give other information regarding vaccinated people just to say that some (a few) vaccinated people can get, spread and even die from covid. If I say that some quantity of unvaccinated people die from covid I don’t believe I have to say that some other quantity are asymptomatic or have no known issues. I’m not misleading anyone, I’m stating a fact. I understand some (a few, perhaps many) don’t want to give anyone any reason to be reluctant in any way to get the vaccine but that doesn’t change the facts. By pushing against me for stating one fact but ignoring others that state other facts I feel some information is being suppressed. Others feel that way too, if you listen to some of the reluctant, they don’t exact trust when certain things are poo pooed and called misleading even though they are also facts.
1 Like
Let’s move on from discussion of misleading vs facts and few vs some
3 Likes
Information from Maine’s largest health network is published at least once a week.
"In Maine, 1,043,492 people or 77% of the state has received at least one dose.
Overall, 954,455 people or 71% of Maine’s population has been fully vaccinated."
7 Likes
A study suggesting that vaccines after natural infection are beneficial.
Masson, a biomedical instruments specialist, and Pelletier, a protein chemistry expert, were interested in an understudied group: people who have been infected by SARS-CoV-2 but were not hospitalized as a result of the infection.
32 non-hospitalized COVID-19 positive Canadian adults
Consequently, 32 non-hospitalized COVID-19 positive Canadian adults were recruited by the Centre hospitalier de l’Université Laval 14 to 21 days after being diagnosed through PCR testing. This was in 2020, before the Beta, Delta and Gamma variants emerged.
“Everyone who had been infected produced antibodies, but older people produced more than adults under 50 years of age,” said Masson. “In addition, antibodies were still present in their bloodstream 16 weeks after their diagnosis.”
Antibodies produced after an infection by the original, “native” strain of the virus also reacted to SARS-CoV-2 variants that emerged in subsequent waves, namely Beta (South Africa), Delta (India) and Gamma (Brazil), but to a lesser extent: a reduction of 30 to 50%.
A surprising reaction to the Delta variant
“But the result that surprised us the most was that antibodies produced by naturally infected individuals 50 and older provided a greater degree of protection than adults below 50.” said Pelletier.
“This was determined by measuring the antibodies’ capacity to inhibit the interaction of the Delta variant’s spike protein with the ACE-2 receptor in human cells, which is how we become infected.” he added. “We didn’t observe the same phenomenon with the other variants.”
When someone who has had a mild case of COVID is vaccinated, the antibody level in their blood doubles compared to an unvaccinated person who has been infected by the virus. Their antibodies are also better able to prevent spike-ACE-2 interaction.
"But what’s even more interesting," said Masson, “is that we have samples from an individual younger than 49 whose infection didn’t produce antibodies inhibiting spike-ACE-2 interaction, unlike vaccination. This suggests that vaccination increases protection against the Delta variant among people previously infected by the native strain.” (emphasis added by me).
Both scientists believe more research should be conducted to determine the best combination for maintaining the most effective level of antibodies reactive to all variants of the virus.
1 Like
That graphic makes the point better than words can. Clear benefit to being vaccinated.
3 Likes
The “so far” in your sample needs context. The relatively high death rates in places like NJ and NY are largely explained by the fact that these places got hit first before the vaccine and before remedial measures became commonplace, and before much was known about treating it. Filter your list reflect the period where the vaccine is available and where we know better how to prevent the spread, and you get a very clear picture of where Covid has been most deadly, and it isn’t in highly vaccinated areas where people take reasonable precautions such as masking and social distancing…
9 Likes
As we approach Veteran’s Day, I feel for those currently in the Armed Forces who needlessly died as well as all those in the service (and Veterans) who have fallen to Covid prior to vaccines being available.
“Eleven service member deaths so far have been reported as a result of COVID-19 in October, according to Defense Department numbers released Wednesday, a third month in a row where fatalities numbered in the double-digits.”
"To date, 73 service members have died. Of those, 71 were completely unvaccinated, Pentagon spokesman Army Maj. Charlie Dietz told Military Times on Wednesday, and two had received the first of a two-dose regimen.
The most recently reported deaths include:
Army Reserve Sgt. First Class David Smith, 56, died Oct. 29. He was a career counselor for the 4th Battalion Army Reserve Careers Group in Columbia, South Carolina.
Idaho Air National Guard Tech Sgt. Adam Holtz, 47, died Oct. 30. He was assigned to the 266th Range Squadron."
1 Like
Yes people always bring this up when I’m not at work with my spreadsheet to look up exact numbers. I’ve been writing down the numbers for each state on my workdays since April 2020.
The last time I checked (a month or two ago) a little more than half of the deaths in NY occurred before June 1, 2020 before anyone had a good grip on what we were dealing with. That is a staggering number. NJ I believe is similar. FL on the other hand was around 15% occurred before June 1, 2020.
And it wasn’t that long ago (Pre delta) where the death rates of NY/NJ were head and shoulders above anyone else. Since then they have been caught and passed and even left in the dust by a couple.
8 Likes
Yes, a lot can be done with data “filtering”. It is interesting to watch the waves of covid march across the US from one area to another as wave upon wave start in different areas and travel around to others. Filtering to certain times will show high rates in one region and lower rates other places.
The current map of cases shows the US being harder hit in the northern/western regions with Delta sliding through after it has already moved through much of the South. Who knows where the next wave will initially hit or how it will travel.
You can watch the progression of cases since the beginning in graphic form from this NYT article. The beginning of the graphic isn’t really a complete picture though as testing wasn’t widely available and so I don’t think it shows the initial wave as well.