Some will have issues dealing with the eventual reality.And another booster, and another booster and another booster..........................????
Some will have issues dealing with the eventual reality.And another booster, and another booster and another booster..........................????
Has any study actually shown that a forth dose is going to be necessary?And another booster, and another booster and another booster..........................????
The flu vaccine, which is not particularly controversial except among the real anti-vax kook fringe, has only about a 50% participation rate, if that, in an average year. It requires only one shot per year. A vaccine that requires a shot every 6 months is just not going to have wide-scale adoption. I'm sorry, but it just won't. Not because people are against the vaccines, but just because people are busy and lazy. You can make all the arguments for it that you want, and many of them are good arguments. I'm just telling you the reality is that it won't happen.So, some vaccinations require yearly or ten year boosters or cycles etc, it's the norm for many vaccinations the last 50 years.
If the current Covid vaccination turns out to need 6 month cycles so be it. It's better we just accept death and sickness?
The main thing about football studies is that the helmets are backwards. The soft part should be on the outsideI wouldn't just discount a behavior change.
Haven't they done football studies that as helmet technology has improved players have developed behaviors that are more dangerous because of the perceived protection of the helmet. Sometimes leading back to the very injuries that the improvements were designed to protect against.
Likewise, have they seen that drivers using a seatbelt or car with other safety technology, like traction control, have been shown to take more risks while driving.
I can very easily imagine vaccinated people taking more risks of COVID exposure than the same people did prior to vaccination.
We know the vaccine reduces the chance you'll get COVID, not eliminates. So the question becomes if they increase risky behavior enough to eliminate (or severely diminish) the reduction from vaccination. Since the risk is also related to the level of community spread, doing more risky things in a low community spread area will negate less of the reduction than doing more risky things in a an area of high spread.
Worst case extreme, a vaccinated person sitting in a poorly ventilated confined space with a bunch of currently infected people. Maximum risky behavior that will severely erode the risk reduction from vaccination.
There's lots of stuff we might call quality improvements that would increase risk slightly but not anywhere near negating the reduction. Especially in areas of low community spread. Those are all things vaccinated people should be able to enjoy while unvaccinated people shouldn't be doing them. Assuming we know who is which, since some of them directly impact the risk calculation of someone else.
If we need boosters every year, so be it. We'll deal with that then.Some will have issues dealing with the eventual reality.
And that may be…If you use what she has as a reason not to get a booster likely over half of people her age or older wouldn't be able to get one. Mild afib is extremely common in the elderly as is high cholesterol.
I don't believe we will ever stop Covid from transmitting. Eradicating it is not going to be a thing. I base that on history. We have only actually eradicated one human virus -- smallpox -- in the entirety of human history. I don't think that means that we have to accept the same level of death and severe disease that we've seen over the past 18+ months. But elimination is also not something realistic.If we need boosters every year, so be it. We'll deal with that then.
My issue today is the assumption that we'll need boosters every year based on the fact that for some people but not all, based on individual risk and environment they needed a single additional dose today. There's no line from that to the assumption that everyone will need one every year. It's all speculation to create fear and portray the vaccine as useless. That we'll never stop COVID and should just give up.
I'm not ready to just give up and let it rip.
What makes us think the COVID vaccine will require everyone to get a shot every 6 months ongoing?A vaccine that requires a shot every 6 months is just not going to have wide-scale adoption.
Yep…I’m a big fan of the obvious approach tooI really wish people who can would just get the vaccination and the booster. Coming on two years of this soon.
We haven't eradicated measles, polio, or mumps either.I don't believe we will ever stop Covid from transmitting. Eradicating it is not going to be a thing. I base that on history. We have only actually eradicated one human virus -- smallpox -- in the entirety of human history. I don't think that means that we have to accept the same level of death and severe disease that we've seen over the past 18+ months. But elimination is also not something realistic.
Did your Mom take 1-3 pills for her cholesterol and then that's it? I've mentioned FIL is Type 1 and so he injects himself daily. It's necessary to do it frequently, so they do it frequently. And since it's a standard protocol you accept it as being necessary. How do you think the first people who were told that they had to take a pill or a shot every day for the rest of their lives felt? We don't know what is necessary for COVID standard protocols. We only know that the initial dosage tested against wild-type was too low against Delta. FIL has had to adjust his insulin several times in the years I've known him, should the doctors just have given up, decided it was a failure?And another booster, and another booster and another booster..........................????
At worst, those other boosters have made my arm really sore for a day. This was a whole new level. No chance will people do this twice a year indefinitely. Won't happen.So, some vaccinations require yearly or ten year boosters or cycles etc, it's the norm for many vaccinations the last 50 years.
If the current Covid vaccination turns out to need 6 month cycles so be it. It's better we just accept death and sickness?
Since covid is contactable and transmissable by both vaccinated and unvaccinated, not only should the unvaccinated avoid close personal contact, but also the vaccinated. Both classes should make it their personal responsibility not to become an incubator for Covid.And that may be…
but wait a second…didn't you say this only is an issue for the vulnerable about a hundred times?
you should be major pro-vaccine booster
“lock up the weak…let me go to magic kingdom”
At worst, those other boosters have made my arm really sore for a day. This was a whole new level. No chance will people do this twice a year indefinitely. Won't happen.
Those other boosters also have how many years of R&D intended to minimize side effects? If we are taking regular COVID boosters in 10 years, they would have undergone similar R&D. This should be as bad as they are because we prioritized speed over minimizing side effects. If people have issues like afib, we should expect protocols like we do like other medications like "make sure you don't take on an empty stomach" or "take with 24 oz of water." Especially, the water, if research confirms a strong link between dehydration and side effects. This process is because of the crisis, it doesn't have to stay this process forever.At worst, those other boosters have made my arm really sore for a day. This was a whole new level. No chance will people do this twice a year indefinitely. Won't happen.
For some people, I think that's what they want before we do anything.It could be after studying COVID for a decade that we realize
Effectiveness wanes over time. You don't know any more than I do what's going to be needed.Who is pushing for twice yearly boosters indefinitely??? It's not a thing I've seen anywhere.
The rate of transmission is not the same between both vaccinated and unvaccinated people. They should not be equated, while both are possible, it's significantly lower for vaccinated people. Depending on the overall current community transmission rate, the reduced rate for vaccinated people can make it not a concern. Alternatively, if the current community transmission rate is high enough, then even the reduced rate for vaccinated people can matter.Since covid is contactable and transmissable by both vaccinated and unvaccinated, not only should the unvaccinated avoid close personal contact, but also the vaccinated. Both classes should make it their personal responsibility not to become an incubator for Covid.
People who got a booster are still within the time period where the initial dosing was extremely highly effective. We won't see a change for booster recipients until it has been at least 6 months post booster.What makes us think the COVID vaccine will require everyone to get a shot every 6 months ongoing?
We've got study participants in this thread. Did I miss the posts where any of them are in studies getting a second booster/fourth dose now?
Did I miss the reports where there's a COVID variant that's escaped the current vaccine response?
Something I'm worried about based on the uncontrolled spread but hasn't happened yet. Something I was routinely told not to worry about. So, now I shouldn't worry about a variant developing that escapes the current vaccine until that happens, but I should worry about needing frequent boosters every year or more often that would only be required if a variant develops and continues to develop again and again that continually escapes the vaccine.
Which is it? COVID is mutating but slowly in ways that haven't evaded the vaccine and not worry or COVID is mutating rapidly in ways that require constant vaccine updates and boosters?
Can we pick a plan on which one we're going to worry about? Sheesh.![]()
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.