Carilion’s Opportunity to Advance the Knowledge About COVID

by James A. Bacon

Roanoke-based Carilion Clinic, the leading health care system in western Virginia, will try using the carrot and the stick in a campaign to elevate the percentage of employees who have been vaccinated for COVID-19, reports The Roanoke Times. Vaxxed employees will receive $150 in their Oct. 15 paycheck, while unvaxxed employees will be subject to weekly testing.

More than 70% of Carilion’s 13,000-person workforce, including 99% of its physicians, have gotten the jab. But three out of ten have not.

If Carilion will be monitoring roughly 2,500 employees, it strikes me that the health system can turn all those nasal swabs into data that is useful for more than just tracking the incidence of COVID in its workforce.

Here’s the thing: Many hospital anti-vaxxers are COVID survivors. I don’t have a percentage, but anecdotal accounts in news reports suggest that it is considerable. The anti-vaxxer argument is that previous exposure to COVID-19 confers natural immunity. There is considerable scientific evidence to support their position. (GMU professor Todd Zywicki’s lawsuit cited much of that evidence.) But many remain unconvinced.

As far as I can see, the matter has not been investigated systematically. Indeed, the media and public health authorities have consistently and steadfastly refused to distinguish between anti-vaxxers who have survived COVID-19 and those who have not. I was aghast this morning when commentators on “Morning Joe” blamed vaccine hesitancy on ignorant, selfish, don’t-tread-on-me, hyper-individualists in the Red States.

To be sure, some vaccine hesitancy comes from people who read crazy content online. Apparently, there are people out there who believe that the vaccine will make their arms turn into magnets. I’ve never met any of these people, but the media assures me they exist. On the other hand, many vaccine resisters are rational people. They just don’t trust the “experts” whose messaging on everything from masks to COVID origins have been all over the map.

Here’s an idea. If you want to persuade more anti-vaxxers to get the shot, provide hard evidence that getting vaccinated will improve COVID survivors’ resistance to the virus.

How could Carilion go about doing that? I’m no expert in establishing scientific protocols, so I would defer to Carilion’s epidemiologists. But I would suggest something along these lines.

First step. Carilion should determine which of the 2,500 unvaccinated employees have contracted COVID-19. Perhaps the most reliable way is to test them for antibodies. If an unvaccinated employee has COVID-19 antibodies, he or she has been exposed to the virus. Some antibody tests have false negatives and false positives, so more than one test may be necessary. This data can be supplemented by any previous COVID-19 tests employees might have taken.

Second step. Compare COVID survivors to those never exposed to the virus. If the COVID survivors are correct, they are at significantly lower risk of contracting the virus again, and they are far less likely than those who never got sick to get the virus again. If they are wrong, they will show the same rate of infection. We don’t know what will happen. But if the exercise were structured as a valid experiment, we might learn something useful that could be applied beyond Carilion.

From the COVID survivor’s perspective, it would be nice to know with greater certainty that previous exposure confers immunity… or not. Also, it would be nice not to be lumped in the public mind with ignorati who fret that vaccination shots will inject microchips into their arms. Conversely, if a structured study shows no additional resistance to the virus, perhaps some Carilion employees would be induced to get the shot in order to gain the immunity they thought they had.

From society’s perspective, it would be useful to know whether or not the 700,000+ documented COVID survivors in Virginia alone have immunities. If they are as resistant as people who have been vaccinated, it makes no sense coercing them into something they don’t want, and it makes no sense to test them every week.

After a year and a half of fighting COVID-19, there is a lot we don’t know. If hospital systems are going to expend resources on testing the unvaccinated, they ought to structure their programs to advance the state of knowledge.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

58 responses to “Carilion’s Opportunity to Advance the Knowledge About COVID”

  1. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    The CDC has actually done this :

    New CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection

    In today’s MMWR, a study of COVID-19 infections in Kentucky among people who were previously infected with SAR-CoV-2 shows that unvaccinated individuals are more than twice as likely to be reinfected with COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated after initially contracting the virus. These data further indicate that COVID-19 vaccines offer better protection than natural immunity alone and that vaccines, even after prior infection, help prevent reinfections.

    The study of hundreds of Kentucky residents with previous infections through June 2021 found that those who were unvaccinated had 2.34 times the odds of reinfection compared with those who were fully vaccinated. The findings suggest that among people who have had COVID-19 previously, getting fully vaccinated provides additional protection against reinfection.

    https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-protection.html

    1. Publius Avatar

      Yes…indicates and suggests is absolute scientific certainty…and we are talking “cases.” Have flu “cases” historically led the news for 2 years?
      Still nothing with any certainty, but Mr. trust the experts blindly follows like a good little lemming…
      What if…the jab resists currently, but inhibits development of a fuller, natural response, and traps you in a cycle of constantly needing the jab? What if…after a few more years, other factors unknown at this time become evident? What if…the media quit censoring skeptics? (It might help with trust and an informed decision.)
      Please explain why someone not at risk must risk some of the adverse effects? Are you one of those elitists demanding that the Deplorables obey you? (And the vax hesitant does not break out that way) Try facts. Try persuasion. And accept the fact that even if they are proved safe and effective (which as a virus will never happen), some people, by right, will choose not.

    2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      Everybody is usually so quick to jump on Larry. Here he has presented a legitimate counterargument, along with documentation. And everyone ignores it. I take that to mean that no one has anything to counter it with, so folks are hoping that, by ignoring it, it will go away.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        I do not believe the CDC is infallible. They are a large and ponderous govt agency that is often too slow to react to fast changing events.

        But they are not guilty of lies and spreading disinformation, even conspiracy theories, as many of their critics are.

        But that study actually has a number of authors, all of whom have legitimate credentials in that field and here we have conservatives who don’t know about it or don’t care or just believe other stuff with no real rhyme or reason other than it is “plausible” to them

        Publius actually well represents some Conservatives, he is far from alone, and even conservatives who have themselves gotten vaccinated will STILL defend what Publius is saying.

        it’s inexplicable to me.

        If one actually thinks the CDC and the Govt are wrong, “elites”, incompetent, why in the world trust them for the vaccine in the first place?

        And when the CDC says we might need a booster and you DID BELIEVE them before when they said we needed two , and you took the two, why distrust them now on the booster? It’s loony tunes.

      2. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        “The findings in this report are subject to at least five limitations. First, reinfection was not confirmed through whole genome sequencing, which would be necessary to definitively prove that the reinfection was caused from a distinct virus relative to the first infection. Although in some cases the repeat positive test could be indicative of prolonged viral shedding or failure to clear the initial viral infection (9), given the time between initial and subsequent positive molecular tests among participants in this study, reinfection is the most likely explanation. Second, persons who have been vaccinated are possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated. Third, vaccine doses administered at federal or out-of-state sites are not typically entered in KYIR, so vaccination data are possibly missing for some persons in these analyses. In addition, inconsistencies in name and date of birth between KYIR and NEDSS might limit ability to match the two databases. Because case investigations include questions regarding vaccination, and KYIR might be updated during the case investigation process, vaccination data might be more likely to be missing for controls. Thus, the OR might be even more favorable for vaccination. Fourth, although case-patients and controls were matched based on age, sex, and date of initial infection, other unknown confounders might be present. Finally, this is a retrospective study design using data from a single state during a 2-month period; therefore, these findings cannot be used to infer causation. Additional prospective studies with larger populations are warranted to support these findings.”

        Correlation does not imply causation.

    3. And then there’s this from the Cleveland Clinic Health System….

      “The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study.”

      https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v2

  2. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Good article. Good point on using the data. But let’s be honest … the anti-vaxers are looking less and less crazy every day (give or take the magnetic arm crowd). It’s now extremely obvious that “science” oversold the effectiveness of these vaccines.

    Who can forget:

    1. If you get vaccinated you will not need to wear a mask.
    2. The vaccines are effective against acquiring COVID from the Delta variant.
    3. There is no need for booster shots.
    4. Herd immunity will be achieved once 60-70% of the population gets vaccinated or recovers from an infection.
    5. Protection from Pfizer’s two-dose vaccine remains above 91% even at six months, according to the company.

    Given the bungled predictions of effectiveness is it any wonder that some people wonder whether there might be bungled predictions about safety?

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      How could the “science” really know ahead of time just how long immunity would last until shots given and evidence collected?

      Science gives us the best assessments at the time they have that current evidence.

      Science changes it’s assessments as the virus evolves and adjusts accordingly.

      You’re dinging them because they can’t predict the unpredictable and when they get more evidence and adjust accordingly?

      “anti-vaxxers”? how about just “ANTI” science ?

      where exactly are you going to get better science than from people who actually are experts in infectious diseases to start with?

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        “How could the “science” really know ahead of time just how long immunity would last until shots given and evidence collected?”

        Fair enough. Let me edit your comment …

        How could the “science” really know ahead of time if the vaccines were safe over the long term until shots given and evidence collected?

        A lack of understanding by the scientists applies to all three aspects of a vaccine … effective, safe and necessary.

      2. Packer Fan Avatar
        Packer Fan

        But again, “Given the bungled predictions of effectiveness is it any wonder that
        some people wonder whether there might be bungled predictions about
        safety?” Another definition of insanity could be continuing to believe the same people who continue to be wrong and/or contradictory”. Oh, and there’s that whole 99.95% of folks who get the virus are going to survive.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          You don’t know how effective the vaccine will be until it’s given and time goes by. What you know ahead of time is an educated guess. In terms of how long the effectiveness will actually last, again it’s an educated guess, not a guaranteed prediction.

          Real scientists NEVER gave guaranteed predictions to start with, they said it would take time to know.

          That’s not “bungling” or telling lies, it’s actually the way science does work, always have, and some folks understand this and clearly others never did and worse are willing to listen to any Tom, Dick, or Harry anyhow.

          We’re supposed to be one of he best educated countries on the planet.

          The virus is teaching us many things about ourselves that are not so pretty.

          1. Packer Fan Avatar
            Packer Fan

            And the part about how 99.95% of the folks who get the virus are going to survive??

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            not sure your point. Are you arguing bad predictions of effectiveness or what?

            Hospitals are full. GObs of money are being spent on hospitalized folks who mostly were not vaccinated but also some who were.

            what’s your point? Do you think that hospitals full of covid folks “proves” it is not deadly or some such?

            Depending on who you believe, the average cost of a Covid hospitalization is 50K.

            Somebody is going to pay that, right?

    2. Matt Adams Avatar
      Matt Adams

      “Good article. Good point on using the data. But let’s be honest … the anti-vaxers are looking less and less crazy every day (give or take the magnetic arm crowd).”

      The problem is that while there are anti-vaccine individuals they do not make a sum total of the group. This notion of labeling anyone who isn’t lock step as “anti” does nothing to further conversations. All it does it serves as a point to deride, demean and chastise someone for having an opinion.

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        I was using anti-vax as shorthand. I probably should have said, “those who do not want to be vaccinated at this time”.

    3. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      I disagree with the “bungled Predictions” charge.
      1. I don’t wear a mask. The only reason I would need to wear a mask is to protect the unvaccinated because I might be asymptomatic. No one predicted the large degree of resistance or hesitancy about vaccinations.
      2. The vaccines are effective against the delta variant. A vaccinated person contracting the delta variant is far less likely to be seriously ill and even far less likely to be hospitalized.
      3. I always assumed there would probably be a need for booster shots. After all, I get an annual flu shot.
      4. We have not achieved the 70 percent level yet, so we don’t know if herd immunity can or cannot be achieved.
      5. I had the Moderna shot. I have not followed any news about the pfizer shot.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        “4. We have not achieved the 70 percent level yet, so we don’t know if herd immunity can or cannot be achieved.”

        That’s an unproven statement, we have no idea where we sit regarding immunity as a Nation. Our percentages is pure guess, as we don’t know when it emerged. We don’t know how many contracted it without symptoms, so on and so forth.

        Vaccines have and will always be a method to reach that immunity state, they are however not the only method.

        1. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          Israel, 3 days ago, had among the world’s highest levels of vaccination for COVID-19, with 78% of those 12 and older fully vaccinated, the vast majority with the Pfizer vaccine. Yet the country is now logging one of the world’s highest infection rates, with nearly 650 new cases daily per million people.

      2. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        What you thought is interesting but irrelevant unless Dick Hall-Sizemore is a pseudonym for Anthony Fauci.

        Fauci,Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Chief Medical Advisor to the President, made the statements 1-3. While he spoke in good faith he was proven wrong. Hopefully, he won’t be proven wrong about the safety of the vaccines.

        Your point in 2 is moving the goalposts. “Effective” was always about not catching COVID, it was not just about repeatedly catching COVID but avoiding death. That new definition of “effective” has only arisen now that it has been seen that the vaccines are not nearly as effective at preventing the spread as was advertised.

        Isreal is well over 70% vaccinated for those eligible. 3 days ago the vax rate in Israel for those 12 and over was 78%. Cases have / are surging in Israel and deaths are now following suit.

        Pfizer itself made the 91% claim.

  3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “I was aghast this morning when commentators on “Morning Joe” blamed vaccine hesitancy on ignorant, selfish, don’t-tread-on-me, hyper-individualists in the Red States.”

    If the shoe fits…

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      and totally on display here in BR daily.

      even Conservatives who actually do get vaccinated, STILL side with the ignorant folks on “principle”. What “principled”? Oh, that Science is “elite” and wrong and not to be believed… etc, etc…

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        Ripper is dead on correct that the changing and confusing messaging is a huge part of the problem. But the problem remains that far too many just refuse to get the shots and that is keeping us in this mess when it could have been greatly reduced (if never fully gone.) Vaccinated people are rarely ending up in the hospital or morgue, and if they do I bet most are dying WITH rather than FROM COVID. It is still the people already vulnerable before the bug who are in trouble usually.

        But here we are, and in the weeks to come the political and media drumbeat that it is the Trumpenproletariat keeping COVID alive will intensify, ignoring the huge problems in the black community as well. (Their issue is racism, of course.) I could see this coming. Now it is here. The Virginia R’s just added 3-4 points to their hurdle between now and November. Biden was positively gleeful yesterday taunting the R governors, because he’s seen the polling I’m sure.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Or, one can realize that from the onset of the pandemic that there would be only two paths on which to walk — take a vaccine, or take your chances with the virus and recovery.

          Fautus is resolute! Faustus shall not repent!

          1. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            There is a third path.

            Since we do not know when the virus actually emerged, someone has already contracted the virus and beat it. Thereby getting immunity through contraction.

            They are not anti-vaxxers just as those who previously contracted chicken pox do not require the vaccine to prove immunity.

          2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Somebody has never heard of shingles…

          3. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            Over a prolonged period of observed fact it has been seen that the risk of getting shingles is reduced by 90% after receiving the Shingrix vaccine.

            This is the reduction in GETTING shingles, not a reduction in pain, discomfort, hospitalization or death from shingles.

            I will be you dinner that none of the current COVID vaccines will even come close to that level of effectiveness over a one year period.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            We won’t know with certitude until quite some time after. What we know is based on data coming in on an ongoing basis.

            It frustrates people that we don’t have exact answers but that’s the essential nature of science.

            We still do not know exactly how cancer works and we’ve been at it for a long time and we certainly don’t know how to stop it. That’s NOT a reason to start listening to quacks.

          5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            The question was whether having chicken pox means you are immune to the chicken pox virus. You are not.

            Not sure what you are getting at but the Covid vaccine remains very effective in terms of both prevention of contracting and reducing severity of breakthrough cases. I am personally very happy my son received it as he just contracted Delta Covid and his symptoms are minor.

          6. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Who knows what he is getting at, other than the typical “I don’t trust science anymore because they lie” folks.

            You’d think that what he is talking about in Israel actually confirms what science is saying about the need for boosters. Instead, even as a vaccinated person himself, he argues that the shots may not be effective. What the ?? – I don’t get the reasoning at all.

            And my bet is, no matter DJ’s “skeptic” arguments here, that he will get the booster himself when available then come right back to BR and line up again with the usual skeptic suspects here in BR , some of whom apparently do also believe science when it comes to the shots – they get them – but then they turn around and impugn science, the CDC, Fauci, their safety, effectiveness, etc.. even as they enjoy the efficacy of the shots they got.

            It’s Alice in Wonderland reasoning.

            .

          7. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            “The question was whether having chicken pox means you are immune to the chicken pox virus. You are not.”

            Yes, yes you’re immune from chickenpox. The shingles while caused by the same virus is a different disease.

            One could learn this fact but understanding that there are two different vaccines for the diseases.

            Instead of down-voting facts like the petulant child you are, you could read and get educated.

          8. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            Over a prolonged period of observed fact it has been seen that the risk of getting shingles is reduced by 90% after receiving the Shingrix vaccine.

            This is the reduction in GETTING shingles, not a reduction in pain, discomfort, hospitalization or death from shingles.

            I will be you dinner that none of the current COVID vaccines will even come close to that level of effectiveness over a one year period.

          9. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I have heard of shingles, I’m just smart enough to know that even with the chickenpox vaccine you can still get shingles.

            “Myth: Shingles is the same disease as the chickenpox.

            Fact: Although shingles and chickenpox are caused by the same virus, they are not the same illness. Chickenpox is usually a milder illness that affects children. Shingles results from a re-activation of the virus long after the chickenpox illness has disappeared. While it typically resolves in about a month for most people, it can also cause severe and long-lasting pain that is very difficult to treat.”

            https://www.nfid.org/infectious-diseases/shingles-myths-and-facts-for-consumers/

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          It’s changing because we are in the process of learning about it as well as the virus itself is changing.

          we have too many folks who want simplistic and static data and this is not it.

          we have all sorts of people just basically making up what they want to believe and citing some “smart” guy who might have a degree but not in infectious diseases or epidiemilogy.

          Who do I believe?

          Not one guy. Not even one gal who is an infectious disease expert who opines an opinion or has done one study not replicated by others.

          I believe what several , a group of experts in that field sag and when they say “at this time” or “until more study” – it actually does mean something. It means they don’t yet know all of it and some of what they have learned to date may actually not be totally correct.

          What would you do instead of this?

          Listen to one guy who has a degree in neurology or some such who says things that sound logical to you?

          We have lost our collective minds on Covid. Everybody and their brother has their own “theory” and the CDC is not to be believed! GAWD!

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Let me impart to you the knowledge I found during my travels of Tibet in my youth. To attain true happiness one must clear their conscience.

            Or…

            You can simply get rid of it like a Conservative.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Perhaps.

            What covid has really shown me, at least in part IMHO, is just how much Conservatives really distrust not only govt, but our institutions like public education and science AND what they will trust instead.

            Some guy who is a neurologist opines about infectious disease, gets published in WSJ instead of as a study in a scientific journal, and his beliefs for which he seems to have little more than his beliefs gets accepted by folks who choose him over a number of legitimate infectious diseases experts – published study findings.

            Even WSJ knows it’s opinion, and puts the article on it’s Opinion pages but that does not dissuade some folks to ignore the CDC/infectious disease study findings and instead believe this guy.

            That’s more than “conscience”.

            It’s apparently Conservatism in 2021.

          3. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Guns and Bibles, Larry. Clutching their guns and Bible.

          4. Stephen Haner Avatar
            Stephen Haner

            Once again, you have no idea about that author’s qualifications but dislike his conclusions, so you attack him. Science is defined as “Larry agrees with this.” And anything Larry disagrees with is false. What a maroon….

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            If you talking about the guy in the WSJ article , it says so on the article.

            right?

            I make the distinction between people who are boni fide infectious disease experts and others who are not , even if they have degrees or even are doctors but in a different field.

            Yes – I won’t get advice from endocrinologist on prostate cancer.

            And I consider the opinion of people who are actual infectious diseases experts over folks who are neurologists when it comes to infectious disease issues.

            If you want to talk about maroons and morons – they seem to not make such distinctions and if someone says something they like, that seems good enough for some!

            A moron thinks a neurologist opinion is equal to an infectious disease expert opinion IMHO.

          6. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            Review the statistics in Israel.

            Facts are stubborn things.

            Since Israel was almost entirely Pfizer maybe that vaccine is the outlier.

            I hope not – that’s the vax I got.

          7. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            “It’s changing because we are in the process of learning about it as well as the virus itself is changing.”

            For the third time in 3 weeks you are right. Well, almost.

            If we’re still learning about the vaccines then why would you call someone stupid or selfish for thinking we might yet learn the vaccines are not safe.

            This is far from settled science.

          8. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Because we KNOW from actual experience that the vaccines DO WORK but we also know they are not 100% and will lose efficacy over time.

            Yes, it’s STUPID to refuse to take a vaccine over supposed safety concerns when that vaccine is as effective or more so than many other vaccines already fully approved and in use for decades.

            No one claims it is “settled science” except the cynics and critics trying to undermine what is true.

            What we actually KNOW right now besides the fact that the vaccines are safe and effective is that they are not 100% safe and effective but they are clearly as safe and effective as many existing ones.

            AND we KNOW the virus is replicating and mutating and changing – it’s a moving target that science is trying to track and that won’t be a perfect process by a long shot , but AGAIN , why would you then go to a quack or other unqualified person to get the “real world facts”?

            We want scientific certitude for a virus that is mutating and evolving, and if we can’t get it from science, we’ll abandon science and listen to whoever says stuff we like to hear instead.

        3. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          “Biden was positively gleeful yesterday taunting the R governors, because he’s seen the polling I’m sure.”

          He was smiling because his handlers told him he would get ice cream afterwards.

          He also has plenty of other albatrosses to deal with that don’t bode well for him.

        4. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          Israel is more than 78% fully vaccinated (for Israelis over 12 – in other words, those who are eligible). Cases are surging. Hospitalizations are surging. Deaths are ticking dramatically upward. Look up the statistics.

          Maybe you’ll be proven right about the vaccines not being particularly effective against the spread but effective against death. Maybe. We’ll see in a couple of weeks in Israel. Or maybe doctors have just gotten better with the treatments and the vaccines aren’t really that effective against preventing deaths either. Or maybe the vulnerable (especially the elderly) are being especially careful and we are seeing the death rate we would have seen if this had happened from the start.

          The simple fact is that a lot of the predictions made a few months ago are being refuted in the real world right now.

          The political implications are interesting but I’m much more interested in the public health ramifications.

          The left is telling fairy tales that claims widespread vaccinations will let us all live happily after.

          Right now, Israel is proving them wrong.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      The funny thing is that Conservatives are always accusing the Liberals of wanting a nanny state, someone to care for them and cover life’s uncertainties.

      And yet, hear their cry, “Where’s my guarantee?”

      Said it yesterday; worth repeating:
      “The vaccines were given 21 days apart on the hopes of creating really high resistance quickly. Probably because the intelligent people, with degrees in medicine, couldn’t imagine there are 40% of Americans, complete morons, who would refuse a life-saving vaccine because of something someone wrote on Facebook.”

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        “Said it yesterday; worth repeating:
        “The vaccines were given 21 days apart on the hopes of creating really high resistance quickly. Probably because the intelligent people, with degrees in medicine, couldn’t imagine there are 40% of Americans, complete morons, who would refuse a life-saving vaccine because of something someone wrote on Facebook.”

        You were wrong yesterday and repeating your lie doesn’t make it anymore true.

        Only the mRNA vaccines are given in two doses and 21/28 days is just the day that maximum effective immunity provided by a single dose (90%) mRNA vaccine occurs.

        “Another report based on Israel’s vaccination experience found that a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine can provide up to 90% protection against COVID-19 infection by day 21.

        The study, performed by British researchers, tracked Israelis who had received their first dose of vaccine.

        “We found that the vaccine effectiveness was still pretty much zero until about 14 days after people were vaccinated,” lead researcher Dr. Paul Hunter, a professor with the University of East Anglia’s Norwich Medical School, said in a university news release. “But then after day 14, immunity rose gradually day by day to about 90% at day 21 and then didn’t improve any further. All the observed improvement was before any second injection.”

        These results support a policy adopted by the United Kingdom to extend the gap between doses out to 12 weeks, to try and get first doses into as many arms as possible, Hunter said.”

        https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210205/why_2_covid_vaccine_doses_are_needed

  4. Apparently, there are people out there who believe that the vaccine will make their arms turn into magnets.

    I’ve been wondering why my tools follow me around the garage lately…

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Yesterday I called the police to report that my lawn mower was stalking me. They hung up.

  5. Publius Avatar

    I’ll throw in a cynical theory, which I don’t think is all that cynical.
    Why such adamant demand for vaxing for a virus (there is no effective vax for a virus – all flu vaxes are the best guess each year). For a virus with an EUA only authorization? Contrary to federal law and medical ethics?

    Because our “experts” need everybody to be vaxed so there is no control/comparison group to make it undeniable how badly they F-ed everything up.

    Prove me wrong.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      I’m not understanding. Are you saying that the vaccines we have are not effective?

      1. Publius Avatar

        I’m saying that the desperation to get everybody vaccinated would be a way to hide the expert malfeasance by eliminating any control/comparison cohort. Get everybody vaxed and claim our return to normal was all due to the heroic efforts of our government overlords servants.
        The non-vaxed and Covid survivors offer too great a risk to show how bad the experts actually did…

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      There is never a requirement to prove the absurd wrong. It is self-evident.

      1. Publius Avatar

        No, Full Troll. Self evident used to be life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is self evident we are living in a lawless banana republic currently. It is self evident that the desire to COVID vax all people is not for medical reasons. But, you do you! Does Soros pay well for you? Do you get paid more with experience or do you get promoted to other comment Boards. I think you’d do well on Pollutico…

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          waiting for Haner. Haner? Haner?

        2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          Man! Where can I get this gig to do this for money?! What a job that would be! Can you send me a link to the want ad…??

          1. Publius Avatar

            You’re being modest…or selfish…wanting to preserve the gig for yourself…and thereby failing EQUITY! of the Leftist Bible…

  6. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Reality intrudes …

    April 1, 2021 –

    “The Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is 91.3% effective up to 6 months after the second dose and 100% effective against severe disease as defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), according to updated data today from the phase 3 trial.”

    https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/04/pfizer-covid-vaccine-91-effective-least-6-months

    Fauci on July 8 –

    “Fauci cited various studies, including three separate real-world studies which showed Pfizer was 79%, 88% and 96% effective against the delta variant.”

    https://www.fox29.com/news/fauci-says-all-3-covid-19-vaccines-effective-against-delta-variant

    Current observed reality from Israel –

    “Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine was 39 percent effective at preventing COVID-19 infection and 88 percent effective against hospitalizations from the virus in Israel, where the delta variant is the dominant strain, CNBC reported July 23, citing a new study from the country’s health ministry.”

    https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/pharmacy/pfizer-shot-39-effective-against-infection-in-israel-91-effective-against-severe-disease.html

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      None of this is “lying” nor is it really contradictory – and you DO have to ask or know WHERE these numbers are coming from. AND what timeframe as more data and evidence is collected, there will be adjustments.

      But I notice you cite different sources including CIDRAP and then right aftter, FOX who is quoting FAUCI who, in turn is citing multiple studies.

      So this is the way that science actually works. People who are boni-fide infectious disease experts do multiple separate studies that may replicate and you can and do get answers that conflict AND confirm…

      what confirms becomes more knowledge. What does not becomes reason for more study.

      That’s how science does work.

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “Israel’s top coronavirus expert says infection rates among Israelis 60 and over are “slowing down,” as a renewed COVID outbreak has triggered soaring infection rates.”

      “In addition, one of Israel’s health maintenance organizations, Maccabi, released on Wednesday its findings on the effectiveness of booster shots. According to the study, a third shot of the coronavirus vaccine is 86 percent effective in preventing COVID-19 infection among 60-year-olds and over.”

      https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-covid-expert-booster-shot-slowing-down-infections-60-older-delta-1.10133115

Leave a Reply