Re: Spread & CFR, R0-Details & Discussion

by dmwalsh568 Wed Jun 16, 2021 8:11 am

dmwalsh568 wrote:
rick1 wrote:People have tested positive on cruse ship that has everyone fully vaccinated, now what do ya do:

https://breaking911.com/2-passengers-on-first-fully-vaccinated-north-american-cruise-test-positive-for-covid/

Let me go out on a limb and say, maybe don't go on a cruise with lots of other people crammed into small communal spaces?

Fortunately for folks on that specific cruise the two positive cases are asymptomatic, but it highlights the risks of having people crammed together for days/weeks at a time.

Of course if we get another cruise with the same problems anytime soon then we can kiss the cruise industry goodbye for a few years....

At least they caught this before any passengers embarked, but it's looking like the cruise industry is in BIG trouble....

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/royal-caribbean-cruise-postponed-covid/index.html

Royal Caribbean postpones inaugural ship sailing after 8 crew members test positive for Covid-19

"All 1,400 crew onboard Odyssey of the Seas were vaccinated on June 4th and will be considered fully vaccinated on June 18. The positive cases were identified after the vaccination was given and before they were fully effective," Bayley said.

by TRex2 Wed Jun 16, 2021 1:08 pm

I wouldn't go on a cruise for completely unrelated reasons, but this makes no sense. If everyone is vaccinated, they are protected from those occasional people who get infected after being exposed or vaccinated.

If the vulnerable people are vaccinated, we are back to the situation we had in Nov 2019, and the rules should be the same as Nov 2019.

by rick1 Wed Jun 16, 2021 4:09 pm

TRex2 wrote:I wouldn't go on a cruise for completely unrelated reasons, but this makes no sense. If everyone is vaccinated, they are protected from those occasional people who get infected after being exposed or vaccinated.

If the vulnerable people are vaccinated, we are back to the situation we had in Nov 2019, and the rules should be the same as Nov 2019.

Agree with ya TRex. I got the maderna vaccine, 2 shots, 4 weeks apart. Only one thing, it is only 95% affective, so, I still have a 5% chance of getting covid.

Some people think with their feet and not their brains.

by TRex2 Thu Jun 17, 2021 1:08 pm

rick1 wrote:... I got the maderna vaccine, 2 shots, 4 weeks apart. Only one thing, it is only 95% affective, so, I still have a 5% chance of getting covid.
...

But, even if you are part of the 5% (of the 25% that are susceptible), and do get the virus, it won't be as bad.

by rick1 Tue Jun 22, 2021 7:59 am

Some 4,000, fully vaccinated people in Massachusetts, test positive for covid:

https://www.foxnews.com/health/4000-fully-vaccinated-tested-positive-virus-massachusetts

by dmwalsh568 Tue Jun 22, 2021 8:52 am

rick1 wrote:Some 4,000, fully vaccinated people in Massachusetts, test positive for covid:

https://www.foxnews.com/health/4000-fully-vaccinated-tested-positive-virus-massachusetts

Reading the article, it's a LOT better than it sounds.

The number of breakthrough cases in the state has been infrequent so far -- accounting for approximately one in 1,000 vaccinated people.

As of June 12, there were 3,791 coronavirus cases among the more than 3.7 million fully vaccinated individuals in Massachusetts, reports said.
"We’re learning that many of the breakthrough infections are asymptomatic or they’re very mild and brief in duration," said Boston University infectious diseases specialist Davidson Hamer, according to the Boston Herald. "The viral load is not very high."

"Breakthroughs are expected, and we need to better understand who’s at risk and whether people who have a breakthrough can transmit the virus to others," he continued. "In some cases, they’ll be shedding such low levels of the virus and won’t be transmitting to others."

So not only have the vaccines been almost 99.9% effective, most of those who do have a breakthrough either have no symptoms or only mild symptoms.

Personally I consider that a major win. Love Eyes

by rick1 Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:41 pm

They now say the delta strain is now as transmissible as the common cold and that is not good for anybody:

https://www.deseret.com/coronavirus/2021/7/30/22601820/cdc-report-delta-variant-transmission

by rick1 Sat Jul 31, 2021 4:28 pm

I know you've heard of this, but here's an article on illegal immigrants with covid being released throughout the U.S., all while joe crow puts restrictions on us tax paying citizens. What else is the head clown going to do:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/border-patrol-official-covid-migrants-released-day-in-day-out

by rick1 Sun Aug 08, 2021 3:14 pm

Many more variants of covid on the way, B.1.621 from Columbia seems to be dangerous but more research is needed.

Don't matter, many of the Columbians have already crossed our border, so I'm sure that variant is already in the U.S. somewhere:

https://www.aol.com/news/explainer-beyond-delta-scientists-watching-121201994-151507404.html

by rick1 Tue Aug 10, 2021 4:29 pm

Doctor destroys covid narrative:

https://tv.gab.com/channel/standonprinciples/view/dr-destroys-the-entire-covid-narrative-611132777b022aa59dd65777

by Dave58 Tue Aug 10, 2021 5:34 pm

rick1 wrote:Doctor destroys covid narrative:

https://tv.gab.com/channel/standonprinciples/view/dr-destroys-the-entire-covid-narrative-611132777b022aa59dd65777

I wondered why somebody that has been sick with covid would need to take the vax , but that's the rules.

I also wondered why we were still getting sick in the summer it doesn't make sense..

My wife and I are still very cautious still wear mask in the store if its crowded.....

by rick1 Sun Aug 15, 2021 7:26 am

joe crow and his circus clowns have discussed covid passport (proof of vaccine) in order to travel interstate, but put in on hold for now, yah right.

As soon as the FDA approves the vaccines within the next month or so (just my opinion), you will have to have your covid passport or stay in your home state:

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/interstatetravel-passport-vaccine/2021/08/13/id/1032321/

by rick1 Tue Aug 24, 2021 6:02 pm

Afghan refugees testing positive for covid once in the U.S.:

https://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-9-evacuated-from-afghanistan-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19-upon-arrival-in-the-us-174829141.html

by dmwalsh568 Wed Aug 25, 2021 7:54 am

rick1 wrote:Afghan refugees testing positive for covid once in the U.S.:

https://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-9-evacuated-from-afghanistan-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19-upon-arrival-in-the-us-174829141.html

from that article:

The nine positive COVID-19 cases were out of 3,293 evacuees who’d been tested on-site at Dulles so far.

So that means 0.273% of evacuees have tested positive.

And they ARE checking them before flying them out:

“Screening occurs at every stop, at every stage of the process,” he said, explaining that elementary health screenings are being done at the Kabul airport for evacuees who are symptomatic, as well as additional screenings at temporary safe havens in Europe and the Middle East where evacuation flights are landing before departing for the United States, where passengers are screened upon arrival.

Though Kirby emphasized that the primary focus is to get as many people out of Afghanistan as possible, “we’re doing the best we can to make sure that we’ve got enough visibility on everyone’s health,” he said. “It’s on everybody’s mind, believe me.”

It’s not clear how many of the positive COVID-19 cases were among Afghan refugees versus American citizens, but the document obtained by Yahoo News notes that early Monday morning, an unspecified number of at-risk Afghans who tested positive for COVID-19 were transported by bus to the Fort Lee Army base in Virginia.

As long as they keep folks testing positive in quarantine I have no problem at all trying to save folks who risked their lives for the US.

edited to highlight that the article author doesn't know if all 9 positive cases were Afghan refugees or Americans who were evacuated.

by rick1 Wed Aug 25, 2021 9:53 am

dmwalsh568 wrote:
rick1 wrote:Afghan refugees testing positive for covid once in the U.S.:

https://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-9-evacuated-from-afghanistan-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19-upon-arrival-in-the-us-174829141.html

from that article:

The nine positive COVID-19 cases were out of 3,293 evacuees who’d been tested on-site at Dulles so far.

So that means 0.273% of evacuees have tested positive.

And they ARE checking them before flying them out:

“Screening occurs at every stop, at every stage of the process,” he said, explaining that elementary health screenings are being done at the Kabul airport for evacuees who are symptomatic, as well as additional screenings at temporary safe havens in Europe and the Middle East where evacuation flights are landing before departing for the United States, where passengers are screened upon arrival.

Though Kirby emphasized that the primary focus is to get as many people out of Afghanistan as possible, “we’re doing the best we can to make sure that we’ve got enough visibility on everyone’s health,” he said. “It’s on everybody’s mind, believe me.”

It’s not clear how many of the positive COVID-19 cases were among Afghan refugees versus American citizens, but the document obtained by Yahoo News notes that early Monday morning, an unspecified number of at-risk Afghans who tested positive for COVID-19 were transported by bus to the Fort Lee Army base in Virginia.

As long as they keep folks testing positive in quarantine I have no problem at all trying to save folks who risked their lives for the US.

edited to highlight that the article author doesn't know if all 9 positive cases were Afghan refugees or Americans who were evacuated.

I have no problem saving folks either!!!! But how many of those 9 that tested positive came in contact with hundreds or thousands of others before they tested positive? Just a simple question.

by dmwalsh568 Wed Aug 25, 2021 10:28 am

rick1 wrote:I have no problem saving folks either!!!! But how many of those 9 that tested positive came in contact with hundreds or thousands of others before they tested positive? Just a simple question.

tl/dr - No way to be sure.

More complete answer: No way of knowing for sure, but I trust that our military is protecting their folks as well as can be expected while still getting the mission done.

I know that the military academies had strict COVID protocols during the pandemic, and I found this site about on-base personnel:

https://www.militaryonesource.mil/family-relationships/family-life/covid-19-resources/military-protective-measures-during-covid-19/

And given that the Afghan refugees are being housed at a few military bases, I suspect (but can't know) that they will be isolated from most others on base and will be tested if symptomatic.

Simple question, but impossible to answer without more information. Thinking

by rick1 Wed Aug 25, 2021 11:17 am

I see your point and I agree with ya, especially when it comes to our military, all have to be vaccinated before being deployed overseas.

What I mean is, of those 9 that tested positive, they all came from the same airport, were transported to another airport and then flown to the U.S.. They have had to come in contract with thousands of other refugees and now they could be spreading the covid.

by TRex2 Wed Aug 25, 2021 3:15 pm

rick1 wrote:Doctor destroys covid narrative:
https://tv.gab.com/channel/standonprinciples/view/dr-destroys-the-entire-covid-narrative-611132777b022aa59dd65777

Some of what he says is correct, and some of it is incorrect, and some of it (especially the percentages) is said in a way designed to deceive (he may have received it from someone else, who was trying to deceive him).

TRex

by rick1 Tue Aug 31, 2021 7:57 am

New strain of covid, (C.1.2) found in South Africa and now has spread to 7 other countries and could circumvent the vaccine:

https://nypost.com/2021/08/30/covid-19-variant-found-in-south-africa-could-circumvent-vaccine-report/

by rick1 Fri Sep 03, 2021 9:46 am

There's no doubt that the covid-19 virus has become political and becomes more political as the days go by.

But when a lab refuses to test someone for covid-19 because of their beliefs or political party, it's time to start firing people from their jobs, no matter who it is. I'd like to say a lot more about this, but since I'm foaming at the mouth over this article, I'll just bite my tongue, for now:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/candace-owens-denied-medical-treatment-colorado-lab-cancels-covid-test-appointment

by Dave58 Fri Sep 03, 2021 10:30 am

rick1 wrote:There's no doubt that the covid-19 virus has become political and becomes more political as the days go by.

But when a lab refuses to test someone for covid-19 because of their beliefs or political party, it's time to start firing people from their jobs, no matter who it is. I'd like to say a lot more about this, but since I'm foaming at the mouth over this article, I'll just bite my tongue, for now:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/candace-owens-denied-medical-treatment-colorado-lab-cancels-covid-test-appointment

I understand biting your tongue I have a couple of family members that have been melting down over people not getting the vax and I have been keeping my mouth shut, but not for very much longer.......

This is not the first time that I have heard of doctors refusing to see people because they were not vaccinated....

by dmwalsh568 Fri Sep 03, 2021 11:07 am

rick1 wrote:There's no doubt that the covid-19 virus has become political and becomes more political as the days go by.

But when a lab refuses to test someone for covid-19 because of their beliefs or political party, it's time to start firing people from their jobs, no matter who it is. I'd like to say a lot more about this, but since I'm foaming at the mouth over this article, I'll just bite my tongue, for now:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/candace-owens-denied-medical-treatment-colorado-lab-cancels-covid-test-appointment

While I disagree with the lab's decision to not test someone, I have to say it's up to small businesses to choose who they do business with. Especially when medical resources are in short supply.

Truthfully what's so bad about not being able to get a COVID test? If you're symptomatic you should isolate or quarantine anyway. If you're vaccinated and exposed but not symptomatic, just wear a mask and go about your life. It's only unvaccinated folks that are a known close contact that need testing for early treatment (like the Regeron treatment of something similar) to prevent hospitalization (or at least reduce the risk of hospitalization.)

The CDC has recommendations about when to get tested: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/your-health/quarantine-isolation.html

by TRex2 Fri Sep 03, 2021 3:33 pm

dmwalsh568 wrote:...
While I disagree with the lab's decision to not test someone, I have to say it's up to small businesses to choose who they do business with. Especially when medical resources are in short supply.
...

Medical Resources are not in short supply at the lab.

That said, I think she might be behind enemy lines.
The line between America and the USSA is growing starker and starker.

America, freedom to chose: vax or no vax, mask or no mask (can be decided by the business you are entering)

USSA, no freedom. Unvaccinated or unmasked will be punished, and establishments that don't help the state enforce the rules will also be punished.

by rick1 Fri Sep 03, 2021 3:48 pm

Agree 100% TRex.

What ever happened to my body/my choice.

I'm a firm believer, that every dog has their day of reckoning.

by dmwalsh568 Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:30 pm

rick1 wrote:Agree 100% TRex.

What ever happened to my body/my choice.

I'm a firm believer, that every dog has their day of reckoning.

Texas doesn't seem to believe that.

Oh, you're talking about vaccinations and not forcing women who find out too late about their pregnancy to carry an wanted fetus to term?

So sorry, easy mistake to make.

For folks who don't see the irony here, take a minute to read this article: https://www.vogue.com/article/my-body-my-choice-the-paradox-of-republican-anti-vaxxers

Here's what I think is the heart of the argument (red emphasis is mine):

Melissa Murray, a law professor at New York University, explained the law to The New York Times: “If the barista at Starbucks overhears you talking about your abortion and it was performed after six weeks, that barista is authorized to sue the clinic where you obtained the abortion and to sue any other person who helped you, like the Uber driver who took you there.” Yes, the people who consider masks a check on their freedom want your barista to be able to sue you if they suspect you’ve had an abortion.

snip

The same group that wants to make it impossible for you to end your pregnancy is furiously insistent that showing proof of vaccination should be illegal.

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/06/07/texas-vaccine-passports-covid-19/

I'm not here to debate abortion. I just wanted to make sure folks realize the irony of using the "my body, my choice" language that has been used for decades in pro-choice circles (since the 60s if this article is correct.)

by rick1 Wed Sep 08, 2021 2:42 pm

by TRex2 Fri Oct 01, 2021 12:44 pm

dmwalsh568 wrote:...
I'm not here to debate abortion. I just wanted to make sure folks realize the irony of using the "my body, my choice" language that has been used for decades in pro-choice circles (since the 60s if this article is correct.)

The whole point of using that language was to turn the argument back against the Left, who for years used that argument, but now wants to disavow the idea. While that may have been a good or bad idea, it was lost on the Left, who never sees themselves as anything but the savior of mankind, and guardians of the earth and all creation.

I think this might have been a better argument, though (and no, I didn't come up with it):

The Protected need to be protected from The Unprotected, by forcing The Unprotected to use the protection that didn't protect The Protected.

Meme found here:
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210922/f33646ddefde89921868d82afb9f1c70.jpg

(I don't know how to upload a picture.)

by rick1 Fri Oct 22, 2021 11:31 am

Looks like the cat is finally got out of the bag, we tax payers paid for gain of function on covid. Now that sounds like we paid to get people sick/die. King Fauci may be in some serious trouble:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/rand-paul-anthony-fauci-nih-gain-function-funding

by rick1 Fri Oct 22, 2021 3:40 pm

Another new covid variant, delta plus, is being watched overseas. The new variant came about last month in the U.K.:

https://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/wireStory/delta-variant-coronavirus-80721514

by TRex2 Fri Oct 22, 2021 5:41 pm

rick1 wrote:Another new covid variant, delta plus, is being watched overseas. The new variant came about last month in the U.K.:
https://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/wireStory/delta-variant-coronavirus-80721514

I just addressed this in another forum.
I guess ABC News needed some filler, and thought panicking the sheeples was a good idea.
Typical of the MSM.

https://www.voanews.com/a/researchers-raise-concerns-over-new-delta-plus-variant-of-coronavirus-/6279741.html

The AY.4.2 subvariant, which has been dubbed “delta plus,” has already been detected in Britain, Russia and the United States, but scientists have not determined if it poses a significant risk of being more contagious than the original version, which triggered a wave of new infections and deaths around the world during the third quarter of 2021, or whether it is more resistant to vaccines.

To be clear. No one should be concerned if it is "more contagious."

They should be asking if it exhibits any new behaviors.

Delta, even though it was less virulent, had a new ability to "hide" from the person's immune system for a couple extra days, giving it a head start in its attack.
(Thus, the higher hospitalization rate, without a higher mortality rate.)

So far, no one is talking about any new behaviors.
But then, they didn't talk about the new behavior of Delta, for several months.

by rick1 Sat Feb 12, 2022 3:45 pm

I placed an order for the free home test for covid and got a confirmation number on January 22, today is February 12th, 24 days and still have received a tracking number for the order or received the order.

Our government at it's best, what a bunch of clowns.

Have any of you ordered and received the free covid home tests?

by TRex2 Sat Feb 12, 2022 5:50 pm

A little update on Omicron.

It seems someone was doing viral research, again. And it escaped, again. (It contains gene sequences from two previous, distantly related strains, both of which are no longer circulating in the population. Other evidence, too.)

But this time it had a silver lining.

Omicron may as well be labeled "contagious vaccine," as it will vaccinate you from the other strains, and is more effective than the man made vaccines.

I don't believe anyone did this on purpose, but I think we got lucky.

by dmwalsh568 Mon Feb 14, 2022 8:37 am

rick1 wrote:I placed an order for the free home test for covid and got a confirmation number on January 22, today is February 12th, 24 days and still have received a tracking number for the order or received the order.

Our government at it's best, what a bunch of clowns.

Have any of you ordered and received the free covid home tests?

I haven't ordered any because I work at a school and all staff (who signed up) getting one box of at home tests each week.

So it may be that most of the tests are going to schools and supply to the general public is constrained. But that's pure speculation on my part as I haven't heard anything else.

by TRex2 Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:42 pm

Dang.

Stand by. Buckle seat belts. We may be heading for a serious bump in the road.

This is preliminary data. No one has confirmed this, but it is being passed around the epidemiologist community.

https://afludiary.blogspot.com/2022/02/preprint-virological-characteristics-of.html
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.14.480335v1.full.pdf+html

Discussion

Although BA.2 is considered as an Omicron variant, its genomic sequence is heavily different from BA.1, which suggests that the virological characteristics of BA.2 is different from that of BA.1. Here, we elucidated the virological characteristics of BA.2, such as its higher effective reproduction number, higher fusogenicity, higher pathogenicity when compared to BA.1.

Moreover, we demonstrated that BA.2 is resistant to the BA.1-induced humoral immunity. Our data indicate that BA.2 is virologically different from BA.1 and raise a proposal that BA.2 should be given a letter of the Greek alphabet and be distinguished from BA.1, a commonly recognized Omicron variant.

(SNIP)

Third, it would be most critical for global health that BA.2 exhibits higher pathogenicity than BA.1. Although clinical researches on the BA.2 pathogenicity are needed, our investigations using a hamster model showed that the pathogenicity of BA.2 is similar to that of an ancestral B.1.1 and higher than that of BA.1.

More importantly, the viral RNA load in the lung periphery and histopathological disorders of BA.2 were more severe than those of BA.1 and even B.1.1. Together with a higher effective reproduction number and pronounced immune resistance of BA.2, it is evident that the spread of BA.2 can be a serious issue for global health in the near future.

In summary, our data suggest the possibility that BA.2 would be the most concerned variant to global health. Currently, both BA.2 and BA.1 are recognised together as Omicron and these are almost undistinguishable. Based on our findings, we propose that BA.2 should be recognised as a unique variant of concern, and this SARS-CoV-2 variant should be monitored in depth.

by Sponsored content