So I took my daughter for round 1 of the Vaccine this morning, and while sitting in the car....
A man exits the building, removes his mask (against clearly marked instructions), lights a cigarette....and proceeds to walk past the line of those awaiting their shots smoking. He gets told by those running the site to put his mask on...but he doesn't and keeps walking and smoking.
Should smokers get priority for vaccinations? Should the reckless behavior of others put my life at a slightly higher risk?
Smokers are getting priority in my state. For the sake of the ICU space.
So I took my daughter for round 1 of the Vaccine this morning, and while sitting in the car....
A man exits the building, removes his mask (against clearly marked instructions), lights a cigarette....and proceeds to walk past the line of those awaiting their shots smoking. He gets told by those running the site to put his mask on...but he doesn't and keeps walking and smoking.
Should smokers get priority for vaccinations? Should the reckless behavior of others put my life at a slightly higher risk?
So I took my daughter for round 1 of the Vaccine this morning, and while sitting in the car....
A man exits the building, removes his mask (against clearly marked instructions), lights a cigarette....and proceeds to walk past the line of those awaiting their shots smoking. He gets told by those running the site to put his mask on...but he doesn't and keeps walking and smoking.
Should smokers get priority for vaccinations? Should the reckless behavior of others put my life at a slightly higher risk?
Really? Should fat people be pushed to the back of the line too? C'mon, we are all in this together. Stop judging!
So I took my daughter for round 1 of the Vaccine this morning, and while sitting in the car....
A man exits the building, removes his mask (against clearly marked instructions), lights a cigarette....and proceeds to walk past the line of those awaiting their shots smoking. He gets told by those running the site to put his mask on...but he doesn't and keeps walking and smoking.
Should smokers get priority for vaccinations? Should the reckless behavior of others put my life at a slightly higher risk?
"I have been very reluctant to discuss my Ivermectin experience – but I feel with all the news coming out, I should at least say something.
"The NIH did something extraordinary last week by upgrading ivermectin for COVID. Before Friday, it was considered a STRONG AGAINST recommendation. As of Friday, our own NIH has upgraded this medication ivermectin for COVID to neither encourage or discourage. That may not sound like much to a layman – but in medicine that is a huge deal. Ivermectin has now joined the same NIH “neither discourage or encourage” recommendation level as remdesevir, convalescent plasma, and monoclonal antibodies that we have all been hearing about over the past months. This NIH action opened up the use of this already FDA approved drug (for parasitic infections and immune conditions like rosacea) for an off label use for COVID. Physicians around the country should be far less reluctant and far less shamed to use it at this point.
"I have to say I was very skeptical of the Ivermectin situation when I first heard about it. After doing a few weeks of research on this situation in November, I began to use it in a very specific group of patients. If a patient is having any symptoms of COVID or certainly is COVID positive, I immediately get them on this medication. Usually 9-12 mg in a one time dose for 2 weeks. The vast majority have only needed a single dose. I also treat their immediate contacts in their home with the exact same dosing. I am doing no other therapy with this right now.
"Before I started doing this, I was admitting to the hospital an average of 2-6 people a week for COVID. I have admitted only a single patient since I started 6-7 weeks ago. I would say the average conversion rate of COVID close contacts before I started this was on the order of 30% or so. I have now had only 4 household contact conversions in the past 6-7 weeks. It has been a very dramatic change. I would make sure everyone understands – the patients still are sick, they are just not sick enough to be placed in a hospital setting. This is not a cure-all. But the potential to unclog our hospitals – and by extension decrease mortality is there for all to see. Big robust studies should begin immediately to test these possible beneficial effects.
"I also want everyone to realize my experience up above is anecdotal, a case series, without a control group. It is how we physicians roll in a time of crisis like this.
"I have been very reluctant to discuss my Ivermectin experience – but I feel with all the news coming out, I should at least say something.
"The NIH did something extraordinary last week by upgrading ivermectin for COVID. Before Friday, it was considered a STRONG AGAINST recommendation. As of Friday, our own NIH has upgraded this medication ivermectin for COVID to neither encourage or discourage. That may not sound like much to a layman – but in medicine that is a huge deal. Ivermectin has now joined the same NIH “neither discourage or encourage” recommendation level as remdesevir, convalescent plasma, and monoclonal antibodies that we have all been hearing about over the past months. This NIH action opened up the use of this already FDA approved drug (for parasitic infections and immune conditions like rosacea) for an off label use for COVID. Physicians around the country should be far less reluctant and far less shamed to use it at this point.
"I have to say I was very skeptical of the Ivermectin situation when I first heard about it. After doing a few weeks of research on this situation in November, I began to use it in a very specific group of patients. If a patient is having any symptoms of COVID or certainly is COVID positive, I immediately get them on this medication. Usually 9-12 mg in a one time dose for 2 weeks. The vast majority have only needed a single dose. I also treat their immediate contacts in their home with the exact same dosing. I am doing no other therapy with this right now.
"Before I started doing this, I was admitting to the hospital an average of 2-6 people a week for COVID. I have admitted only a single patient since I started 6-7 weeks ago. I would say the average conversion rate of COVID close contacts before I started this was on the order of 30% or so. I have now had only 4 household contact conversions in the past 6-7 weeks. It has been a very dramatic change. I would make sure everyone understands – the patients still are sick, they are just not sick enough to be placed in a hospital setting. This is not a cure-all. But the potential to unclog our hospitals – and by extension decrease mortality is there for all to see. Big robust studies should begin immediately to test these possible beneficial effects.
"I also want everyone to realize my experience up above is anecdotal, a case series, without a control group. It is how we physicians roll in a time of crisis like this.
I do not have a problem with this. Only if it should become a mandatory requirement.
"Your papers please" ... then we have a problem.
used to be that you had to show proof of being vaccinated for smallpox before travelling between Europe and North America. Mandatory within a country and mandatory between countries are different things.
Remember smallpox? It used to exist.
Yeah, I was vaccinated for it like everyone else back in the 50's. You could easily tell who had been as there were small circular scars on many people's shoulders where they were vaccinated. You knew what the scar was from without even having to ask. It was still very active back then.
I wiki'ed for a refresher and then found information about an "immunity passport" which addresses the concern I raised about people who were survivors and did not need to be vaccinated.
On the other side, it is argued that it would be disproportionate to deprive immune persons – who can neither infect themselves nor others – of their basic freedoms. This general prevention would only justified as ultima ratio.[26] Accordingly, Govind Persad and Ezekiel J. Emanuel stress that an immunity passport would follow the “principle of the ‘least restrictive alternative’“ and could even benefit society:[27]
“Just as the work of licensed truckers benefits those unable to drive, the increased safety and economic activity enabled by immunity licenses would benefit the unlicensed. For instance, preferentially hiring immune individuals in nursing homes or as home health workers could reduce the spread of the virus in those facilities and better protect the people most vulnerable to COVID-19. Friends, relatives, and clergy who are immune could visit patients in hospitals and nursing homes.”
I do not have a problem with this. Only if it should become a mandatory requirement.
"Your papers please" ... then we have a problem.
used to be that you had to show proof of being vaccinated for smallpox before travelling between Europe and North America. Mandatory within a country and mandatory between countries are different things.
this may apply to anyone who has been in a rct study as well
also if you have been in a study and aren't sure if you had the real vaccine you can schedule an appointment to take a vaccine publicly and at that point if you call the study sponsor they will break the blind and let you know one way or the other
regards
Pfizer has informed the participants in their testing as to whether they got the vaccine or the placebo.
And a further thought regarding this vaccination passport thing ... what is there in regards to people who have had the virus and survived ? There needs to be a program with equal weight for these people to have proof they have been infected and are no longer a threat to everyone else and do not need to be vaccinated. Otherwise these people will have to be tested every time they board a plane or get medical care at a great personal financial cost as well as a waste of limited resources.
this may apply to anyone who has been in a rct study as well
also if you have been in a study and aren't sure if you had the real vaccine you can schedule an appointment to take a vaccine publicly and at that point if you call the study sponsor they will break the blind and let you know one way or the other
regards
Interesting.
The wife had a procedure last week and while talking with her doc, he told her that he was recently tested and found out that he had been infected. He said that he had a time recently where he felt lousy for a couple of days and then it passed. Does not know how he got infected. No need for him to get vaccinated now. Evidently he did not infect anyone while he had it or there would be some known issues with the people he had come into contact with. This guy is not a chump. Nor is the hospital. Nationally known specialist. We have all known each other for about 15 years and have a relationship were we can all be candid and honest with each other and discuss these very sensitive matters with mutual trust.
Just goes to show that nothing is fool proof and even in the most comprehensive preventative circumstances, stuff still happens.
And a further thought regarding this vaccination passport thing ... what is there in regards to people who have had the virus and survived ? There needs to be a program with equal weight for these people to have proof they have been infected and are no longer a threat to everyone else and do not need to be vaccinated. Otherwise these people will have to be tested every time they board a plane or get medical care at a great personal financial cost as well as a waste of limited resources.
this may apply to anyone who has been in a rct study as well
also if you have been in a study and aren't sure if you had the real vaccine you can schedule an appointment to take a vaccine publicly and at that point if you call the study sponsor they will break the blind and let you know one way or the other
A coalition of tech and health organizations including Oracle, Microsoft, and the Mayo Clinic, is reportedly working to develop a digital COVID-19 vaccination passport that would allow businesses, airlines, and governments to check if individuals have received the vaccine.
Whaddaya think, if anything - is behind these first mentioned three names?!
The first two are for-profit software* companies, the third is a nonprofit healthcare provider. What do I see behind it? Simple: vaccines are the single most effective tool we have to fight disease. Unvaccinated people are going to be vulnerable to covid until it dies out in the population and need special precautions to reduce the risk of infection. Those precautions are burdensome and costly.
Vaccinated people don't require those precautions. If we know who is vaccinated and who isn't we know who requires precautions and who doesn't. This is an information problem, and these companies have a great deal of expertise in gathering and making use of information.
The covid pandemic has both direct effects (400K deaths and climbing just in the US, dog knows how many hospitalizations, huge numbers of man-hours spent recovering, and long-term health consequences we are still learning about) and indirect effects (lost productivity and revenue due to restrictions to prevent disease transmission). These companies are trying to help solve that problem using the tools they have.
Why, what do you think is behind it?
*Microsoft also sells hardware, but it's less than a third of its revenue.
I do not have a problem with this. Only if it should become a mandatory requirement.
A coalition of tech and health organizations including Oracle, Microsoft, and the Mayo Clinic, is reportedly working to develop a digital COVID-19 vaccination passport that would allow businesses, airlines, and governments to check if individuals have received the vaccine.
Whaddaya think, if anything - is behind these first mentioned three names?!
The first two are for-profit software* companies, the third is a nonprofit healthcare provider. What do I see behind it? Simple: vaccines are the single most effective tool we have to fight disease. Unvaccinated people are going to be vulnerable to covid until it dies out in the population and need special precautions to reduce the risk of infection. Those precautions are burdensome and costly.
Vaccinated people don't require those precautions. If we know who is vaccinated and who isn't we know who requires precautions and who doesn't. This is an information problem, and these companies have a great deal of expertise in gathering and making use of information.
The covid pandemic has both direct effects (400K deaths and climbing just in the US, dog knows how many hospitalizations, huge numbers of man-hours spent recovering, and long-term health consequences we are still learning about) and indirect effects (lost productivity and revenue due to restrictions to prevent disease transmission). These companies are trying to help solve that problem using the tools they have.
Why, what do you think is behind it?
*Microsoft also sells hardware, but it's less than a third of its revenue.
