RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Around the Campfire: 2019–2022 CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC POSTINGS

RV Blog

  |  

RV Sales

  |  

Campgrounds

  |  

RV Parks

  |  

RV Club

  |  

RV Buyers Guide

  |  

Roadside Assistance

  |  

Extended Service Plan

  |  

RV Travel Assistance

  |  

RV Credit Card

  |  

RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Around the Campfire

Open Roads Forum  >  Around the Campfire  >  General Topics

 > 2019–2022 CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC POSTINGS

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 162  
Prev  |  Next
Sponsored By:
BCSnob

Middletown, MD

Senior Member

Joined: 02/23/2002

View Profile



Posted: 10/05/21 03:53pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

specta wrote:

So tell me why it matters if I get the vaccine or not.

The more infected people, the more mutations will evolve
The more mutations the more likely the virus will evolve more fit and transmissible variants
Higher vaccination rates mean lower number of infected people

Moderator

Tennessee

Moderator

Joined: 01/19/2004

View Profile



Posted: 10/05/21 04:35pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Ok folks, it is futile to argue with the 'deniers' regarding getting vaccinated, or not. It is time to move on in this thread with data supported posts. Thank you.

MEXICOWANDERER

las peñas, michoacan, mexico

Senior Member

Joined: 06/01/2007

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 10/05/21 05:08pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Merck, A pharmaceutical co I respect is making progress on an oral Rx to suppress mild to moderate infections. Not just symptoms but viral loading. Too much of the public is focused on manipulating things that to them appear to be in stasis. The reality is, it is everything but static as far as advancements are concerned.

For the dubious, there is a lot of money at stake in oral suppression medication. And I try to keep in mind COVID-19 is a Novel pathogen. New. And research will inevitably branch out to new understandings and management of other very real dangers of influenza hybrids and zoonotic mutants.
Stiff upper lip [emoticon]

https://www.statnews.com/2021/10/04/what........ont-know-about-mercks-new-covid-19-pill/

MEXICOWANDERER

las peñas, michoacan, mexico

Senior Member

Joined: 06/01/2007

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 10/05/21 08:42pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

The current IT'S ALL ABOUT ME attitude Pianotuna is loud but not ubiquitous. Remember the popular phrase from fifty years ago IGNORE ALIEN ORDERS? I automatically scroll past IF YOU HAVE TINNITUS DO THIS IMMEDIETLY advertisements.

I am hanging tough with Johns Hopkins, The Lancet, and other Instutional information. JAMA is reliable. So is information from The Mayo Clinic.

There is going to be a mind-numbing amount of raw data collected during this upcoming winter when people gather in heated ill-ventilated homes, stores, and houses of worship. Last winter the system was utterly unprepared. It's going to be a different story in 2022.

So I am taking a different tack. Rather than argue, I try my best to protect myself and my family. I am subscribed to three professional clinical oriented publications watching the latest news. I chuckle when I hear myself saying I don't have enough time left, to waste arguing.

pianotuna

Regina, SK, Canada

Senior Member

Joined: 12/18/2004

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 10/05/21 09:43pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Well bless my whiskers...the first data analysis is awaiting peer review--but appears to indicate Delta is more deadly. Surprise surprise.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.05.21260050v2

"Increases with Delta variant were more pronounced: 120% (93-153%) for hospitalization; 287% (198-399%) for ICU admission; and 137% (50-230%) for death."

For a layman's version here is an article from a what I believe is a reliable news source:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/a........ially-more-dangerous-than-native-strain/


Regards, Don
My ride is a 28 foot Class C, 256 watts solar, soon to have SiO2 batteries, 3000 watt Magnum hybrid inverter, Sola Basic Autoformer, Microair Easy Start.

Deb and Ed M

SW MI & Space Coast, FL USA

Senior Member

Joined: 06/07/2004

View Profile



Posted: 10/06/21 08:09am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

pianotuna wrote:

Well bless my whiskers...the first data analysis is awaiting peer review--but appears to indicate Delta is more deadly. Surprise surprise.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.05.21260050v2

"Increases with Delta variant were more pronounced: 120% (93-153%) for hospitalization; 287% (198-399%) for ICU admission; and 137% (50-230%) for death."



Thank you - this makes me feel less like an ogre for telling my daughter that her family (daughter in college + boyfriend; son is Jr in high school + girlfriend) - none of whom is vaccinated - that they can't spend an upcoming weekend at my house. The Delta variant is soaring in Northern Michigan where they live - I've offered to pay for a hotel room. The entire family will be celebrating my husband's birthday - the vast majority of the family is vaccinated; and the party will be in a well-ventilated indoor riding arena....LOL! We are taking the pandemic seriously.

BCSnob

Middletown, MD

Senior Member

Joined: 02/23/2002

View Profile



Posted: 10/07/21 06:50am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Pfizer asks US to allow COVID shots for kids ages 5 to 11


Why is the news above important.

Some have stated that Covid-19 transmission within schools is low; but this suggests that assertion may not accurately reflect reality in all school situations (like the one below and all those schools shut down because of high infection rates).

Outbreak Associated with SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant in an Elementary School — Marin County, California, May–June 2021
CDC 3Sept2021

Quote:

The index patient’s students began experiencing symptoms on May 22. During May 23–26, among 24 students in this grade, 22 were tested. A COVID-19 case was defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or antigen test result.* Twelve (55%) of the 22 students received a positive test result, including eight who experienced symptom onset during May 22–26. Throughout this period, all desks were separated by 6 ft. Students were seated in five rows; the attack rate in the two rows seated closest to the teacher’s desk was 80% (eight of 10) and was 28% (four of 14) in the three back rows (Fisher’s exact test; p = 0.036) (Figure 1).


* This post was edited 10/07/21 07:11am by BCSnob *

MEXICOWANDERER

las peñas, michoacan, mexico

Senior Member

Joined: 06/01/2007

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 10/07/21 09:52am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

The population has yet to be forced indoors by cold weather and the closing of doors and windows. The additive effects of no masks, no distancing and no vaccine will start to show up.

BCSnob

Middletown, MD

Senior Member

Joined: 02/23/2002

View Profile



Posted: 10/07/21 10:25am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

This was an interesting read (as much as I could follow).

The durability of immunity against reinfection by SARS-CoV-2: a comparative evolutionary study
The Lancet Microbe Oct 1 2021

Quote:

Findings

We obtained antibody optical density data for six human-infecting coronaviruses, extending from 128 days to 28 years after infection between 1984 and 2020. These data provided a means to estimate profiles of the typical antibody decline and probabilities of reinfection over time under endemic conditions. Reinfection by SARS-CoV-2 under endemic conditions would likely occur between 3 months and 5·1 years after peak antibody response, with a median of 16 months. This protection is less than half the duration revealed for the endemic coronaviruses circulating among humans (5–95% quantiles 15 months to 10 years for HCoV-OC43, 31 months to 12 years for HCoV-NL63, and 16 months to 12 years for HCoV-229E). For SARS-CoV, the 5–95% quantiles were 4 months to 6 years, whereas the 95% quantiles for MERS-CoV were inconsistent by dataset.




This quote from the article is pertinent
Quote:

Undue public confidence in the long-term durability of immunity following natural infection by SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to contribute to vaccine hesitancy,34 perhaps because of a false equivalence with the long-term immunity after natural recovery from evolutionarily divergent viruses causing diseases such as measles, mumps, and rubella. By contrast, numerous respiratory viruses such as influenza, human rhinoviruses, or coronaviruses can overcome the immunity conferred by previous infections by evolving new variants in the protein domains most frequently surveilled and targeted by the human immune system. Just over a year into the COVID-19 pandemic, novel SARS-CoV-2 variants that can vary in severity of infection and evoke differential immune system responses and that can thwart the durability of immunity started arising.35 Such novel variants probably play a similar evolutionary role in the persistence of lower-severity, endemic human coronaviruses.4 Mitigation of the potential evolution of immune-evading SARS-CoV-2 variants in the near-future might depend crucially on a rapid global deployment of vaccination, which can induce higher immunogenicity than natural infection.36


The duration of immunity provided by natural infection or vaccination is still being evaluated for an evolving virus. The data on if natural immunity is comparable to that from vaccination is not well established at this time; there have been very few studies published on the duration of immunity from natural infection as compared to the analogous studies on duration of immunity from vaccination. The quote above offers a word of caution about extrapolating DOI from natural infection by other viruses to DOI after infection by SARS-CoV-2 and predictions of “herd immunity” for an evolving virus.

* This post was edited 10/07/21 10:34am by BCSnob *

BCSnob

Middletown, MD

Senior Member

Joined: 02/23/2002

View Profile



Posted: 10/07/21 11:21am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

I’ve reviewed 4-6 retrospective studies on reinfection where there were 10s to low 100s of patients in the reinfected cohort. From these low numbers (compared to infection rates in the unvaccinated never infected cohort) the authors have estimated effectiveness of previous infections of ~85% out to 4-6 months after the first infection. Please note when comparing the effectiveness in these studies to the effectiveness from the clinical studies of vaccines the very large differences in patients (10s-100s for natural immunity compared to 10,000s in each cohort for vaccine immunity). Because of the low numbers in the reinfected cohort, effectiveness vs population demographics (age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities, etc) could not be evaluated. Only the previously posted study from the VA had 2 age groups.

If interested I can post links or you can go search on google scholar using the terms I used:

covid reinfection rate

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 162  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  Around the Campfire  >  General Topics

 > 2019–2022 CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC POSTINGS
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Around the Campfire


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:




© 2022 CWI, Inc. © 2022 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved.