One problem is that the antibodies might not be present in detectable amounts after about 3 months or so. But T-cell immunity continues. I don't think they have a way to detect that, though.
Let'm die!
- Thread starter Henro
- Start date
- Status
You're making unfounded assumptions there.
My fire department requires that we provide evidence of Hepatitis B vaccination or sign a waiver stating that we decline.
A guy on another board is doing research on antibodies. Here’s a link to his latest paper. https://www.researchhub.com/paper/819496/summary
He also sent it to several news outlets. So far, nobody wants to talk to him, go figure.
The Ole Miss Head Coach just announced he tested positive. Their entire team 100%, and he were vaccinated. But, he’s still taking the game off. Apparently, his vaccination doesn’t work, and he’s not willing to risk spreading to his team.
Using vaccination as a gate to do something doesn’t make sense to him, apparently.
Using vaccination as a gate to do something doesn’t make sense to him, apparently.
Before deciding if his vaccination doesn’t work, let’s see if he ends up in the hospital or worse.The Ole Miss Head Coach just announced he tested positive. Their entire team 100%, and he were vaccinated. But, he’s still taking the game off. Apparently, his vaccination doesn’t work, and he’s not willing to risk spreading to his team.
Using vaccination as a gate to do something doesn’t make sense to him, apparently.
Anybody that denies breakthrough infections in vaccinated are not possible is mistaken.
Same might be said for anybody claiming breakthrough infections are more likely to be more serious in the vaccinated than infections in the unvaccinated.
Honestly, I do not think this is rocket science...but not being a rocket scientist I can’t claim to be sure.
We we each need to apply our own common sense...
edit: Additionally, since it seems to be accepted that with the delta variant is is likely those vaccinated suffering breakthrough infections are able to pass the virus on to others, wouldn’t it be a bit irresponsible if he stayed in circulation?
Last edited:
OK, but you seem to be implying that his decision was perhaps a bit irrational...
No implying at all about his decision. Implying about whether vaccines work or not. He obviously thinks not.
My impression was that the guy understood that it is possible for him to spread the virus, while experiencing a breakthrough infection.
He also seems to understands that his vaccinated players and staff have a chance of being infected by him, and getting their own breakthrough infections, if he works closely with them.
Nothing stated in the post above indicates that he believe the vaccines do not work.
What would you consider appropriate action if he considered the vaccine to work?
If I have it correct from the article
The coach and all the team members were vaccinated
The coach contracted the virus and illness regardless of the vaccine
The coach is concerned about spreading the disease to others who are also vaccinated.
Just what does the vaccine do that would be considered "working".
Unless you conflate vaccine and injectable therapeutic. ....
What the vaccines do is reduce or eliminate serious affects of the virus. Of course if one denies the data presented by reputable sources, all bets are off.
I think the appropriate action was exactly what he did. If unvaccinater he might be in intensive care right now, or might just have the sniffles.
I’d would guess, yes guess, that had he not been vaccinated he would be suffering much more than suffering not at all, except for not being able to coach as he would normally...
The coach did not end up hospitalized. Sounds like he is not even showing symptoms. Things could change though.
We we all need to make our own decisions. But we need to keep an open mind and see things for they way the MAY likely be.
I think it’s clear the coach didn’t think it worked 100% and wasn’t willing to risk it. I think what he did was fine.
Of course, some are still pretending that everyone “must” be vaccinated to “prevent” the spread, but obviously, that wasn’t good enough for the coach.
Seems like people are starting to realize that other than an reducing an individual impact, the vaccine isn’t all it’s being sold as. So when is the truth going to hit the “reputable” news sources.
Of course, some are still pretending that everyone “must” be vaccinated to “prevent” the spread, but obviously, that wasn’t good enough for the coach.
Seems like people are starting to realize that other than an reducing an individual impact, the vaccine isn’t all it’s being sold as. So when is the truth going to hit the “reputable” news sources.
Most reasonable people likely realize ANY vaccine is not 100% effective.I think it’s clear the coach didn’t think it worked 100% and wasn’t willing to risk it. I think what he did was fine.
Of course, some are still pretending that everyone “must” be vaccinated to “prevent” the spread, but obviously, that wasn’t good enough for the coach.
Seems like people are starting to realize that other than an reducing an individual impact, the vaccine isn’t all it’s being sold as. So when is the truth going to hit the “reputable” news sources.
In my mind reducing individual impact is what taking any vaccination is about. Anything positive in addition is just a bonus.
I don’t think it is clear what that coach was/is thinking except in one’s imagination. We can only observe the action and guess the motivation. To be sure we would need to hear from the coach himself.
It never was sold as 100% effective at preventing someone from catching covid. It was touted at being 90 some odd percent effective at preventing hospital requiring illness and death and some lower fraction slight illness. This was viewed as hugely helpful.I think it’s clear the coach didn’t think it worked 100% and wasn’t willing to risk it. I think what he did was fine.
Of course, some are still pretending that everyone “must” be vaccinated to “prevent” the spread, but obviously, that wasn’t good enough for the coach.
Seems like people are starting to realize that other than an reducing an individual impact, the vaccine isn’t all it’s being sold as. So when is the truth going to hit the “reputable” news sources.
To understand this you have to look at it at the population level, not just the "what's in it for me" level. All of the arguments and some of the links to supporting data are in the thread above.
A couple of folks at the FDA must dislike what is happening in their department.
arstechnica.com
"Two top vaccine regulators have resigned from the Food and Drug Administration, revealing anger, frustration, and turmoil at the federal agency as it faces intensifying pressure to authorize COVID-19 vaccine booster shots and doses for children under the age of 12.
The two regulators leaving are Marion Gruber, director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR), and OVRR Deputy Director Phil Krause. Gruber has been with the FDA for more than 30 years, and Krause has been at the agency for more than a decade.
Their resignations, first reported by pharmaceutical trade publication BioCentury, were apparently sparked by frustration that the Biden administration had overstepped the FDA in announcing plans to offer COVID-19 booster shots beginning on September 20. The pair also clashed with higher-up Peter Marks, who reportedly went along with the administration's plans. Marks is the director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), which includes the OVRR."
Anger, frustration at FDA over Biden’s booster plan; two top regulators resign
“Huge loss” at FDA amid concerns of political pressure over vaccine decisions.
arstechnica.com
"Two top vaccine regulators have resigned from the Food and Drug Administration, revealing anger, frustration, and turmoil at the federal agency as it faces intensifying pressure to authorize COVID-19 vaccine booster shots and doses for children under the age of 12.
The two regulators leaving are Marion Gruber, director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR), and OVRR Deputy Director Phil Krause. Gruber has been with the FDA for more than 30 years, and Krause has been at the agency for more than a decade.
Their resignations, first reported by pharmaceutical trade publication BioCentury, were apparently sparked by frustration that the Biden administration had overstepped the FDA in announcing plans to offer COVID-19 booster shots beginning on September 20. The pair also clashed with higher-up Peter Marks, who reportedly went along with the administration's plans. Marks is the director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), which includes the OVRR."
Daren Todd
Well-known member
Lifetime Member
Equipment
Massey Ferguson 1825E, Kubota Z121S, Box blade, Rotary Cutter
You have pretty similar options for vaccinations in other industries as well. Company I work for will pay for tetanus shots and hepatitis shots.
Once a year we get handed options to get them or decline them. I'm due for a new tetanus in a couple years. Doctor verified my hepatitis shots are still active when he did my annual blood tests with my physical.
So, what you're saying is that they are NOT forcing or coercing you to take the Hep B shot. They're giving you a CHOICE to sign a waiver that says you don't want to? That's actually a good thing, and as it should be. But, if you contract Hep B while working there, you cannot sue the fire department for exposing you to it, if you signed the waiver. But think about it just for a second, and who is the FD is actually protecting. You? NOPE! Them. Their lawyers drew up that waiver, it was not a consensus amongst the employees. That came from the top down, much like the current regime would do with the COVID miracle drugs that don't work. Hep B research has been around for a VERY long time, and it's relatively safe, but you STILL have the option to not take it because of your civil rights. COVID-19? Umm less than two years since it was isolated as a new strain of flu. Employers being allowed to coerce employees and set standards which have NOTHING to do with qualification for a job sets a whole new low bar for civil rights. You can kiss your rights as an employee goodbye if you accept this. Short term, the creators will make it look like it's a good thing for you. Then, you'll get your barcode stenciled on too. What's the next round up going to be?
It seems to me that employers set all kinds of requirements for employment.
Including required safety equipment (As I mentioned above). Mostly there for the protection of the employee (as well as protection of the employer from lawsuits...this is the USA).
Granted, a vaccination is a bit different, but still lack of one, whatever vaccination it might be, can still have an impact on the employer. Employee gets sick, employer looses the the employee from the workforce, may incur additional expenses related to medical care, and so on.
I do not see civil rights being a part of the equation. We all have a right not to work somewhere. Not sure we have a right to dictate to an employer what their requirements for employment should be, regardless of the motivation that put those requirements in place.
Granted the line has to be drawn somewhere though...and it kind of has been. Eye color as a condition of employment would almost always be a no-no, but I guess even then it might not be in some cases...don't really know.
Last edited:
I'm replying late again because I'm not checking the boards everyday but wanted to respond to this, because this is a little deceiving. I do not disagree that getting vaccinated offers better protection against covid than not being vaccinated, so we agree on that. However, the use of these numbers to determine a .006% chance of severe illness is a little misleading. To really know your risk for severe illness from covid you would have to look at how many breakthrough cases have occurred versus how many progressed to severe illness.
To understand how much the vaccine helps you would then need to look at all unvaccinated people who got covid, and then how many of those progressed to severe illness. The numbers should definitely look better for the vaccinated group, but you likely wont see some drastic over the top comparison. The reason for this is because the vast majority of people who get covid still have just mild to moderate symptoms that do not progress to a severe level. In fact, as the CDC often mentions, their numbers are undercounts because there are a lot of mild or asymptomatic covid cases out there that never get reported because people simply do not get tested, so you end up losing a lot of your very mild cases in the data. The severe cases - the ones that end up in the hospital are almost always counted and reported by contrast. This can cause the data to skew, making morbidity rates look higher than they may actually be for example.
It is not my goal to try and say covid is a nothing burger. However, I do feel it is very easy to get overwhelmed by all the covid overload from the media, the constant numbers, the talk of hospitals overflowing, and to start getting the impression that if you get covid you are in big trouble. It is hard to remain realistic in an environment of fear, and with a media that sensationalizes everything. The fact does still remain however that the mortality rate from covid infection, even among unvaccinated folks, is extremely low. The overall mortality rate due to covid in the USA from the numbers we have is 1.6%. Its important to remember though that the 1.6% is inflated because it includes only reported/known cases of infections. The actual mortality rate will be lower than 1.6% if you could magically capture all the infections where people simply never went to get tested, but that is impossible.
All that said, as my previous post stated, all outcomes are probabilities. If you are an older person, certainly over age 60, getting the vaccine would be highly recommended. If you also had diabetes or are obese, you are at even further risk serious illness. If you choose not to take the vaccine, then you of course are taking an increased risk of being more severely affected by covid. However, be clear that the increases we are talking about arent as you may be lead to think. The vast majority of BOTH camps are not dieing from covid.
- Status