There’s no indication you are any less protected than you where when first receiving the shot. J&J vaccinated persons are a relative minority; in this context 20 “vaccinated” persons isnt particularly meaningful unless you know what they were vaccinated with.
If your doctors appointments are important, I firmly believe you are doing yourself more harm and incurring more risk by delaying them, than you would by attending those appointments as-scheduled. I’m just stating my opinion, not trying to sell you on anything; it’s clearly your own decision to make.
It certainly is; my life my decision. And it was a rather easy one for me to make.
Here in the rural region where I live, the vaccination rate is very low. There are a great many unvaccinated people here and the last time I visited the doctor, several months ago, I was forced to spend far too much time in a large waiting room filled nearly to overflowing with such persons. Back then I was a lot closer to the day I received my shot, and the rate of virus penetration here was only about a fifth or a sixth of what it is now. Our nearly full hospitals are having to send some patients out of this region to receive care.
kn95/n95 seem to still be mostly available (though less than a month ago). A 95 respirator plus being vaccinated probably lowers your risk even in those situations to very close to zero.
It also sounds like you are probably eligible for a booster, or will be soon.
Nearly everyone over 12 is currently eligible at 6 months. (BMI > 25, for example, is eligible)
That can’t be right. The local news (and probably the natl news), repeated multiple times daily, is that the un-vaccinated are the people getting very sick, hospitalized, and ICU’d, and dead.
Although I don’t understand your fear, I respect your right to have it. I sincerely hope that your missed appointments are not detrimental to your health.
I wonder how many lives have been lost (not just suicides) due to fear of the virus (skipped/refused appts, delayed procedures, skipped/delayed testing, delayed rehab, etc.). Even the rabid vaccinators must admit that the fear of the Wuhan Flu has cost lives.
I own both, and did back at the end of June as well. The doctor visit I postponed is important. But it does not relate to a medical problem which threatens my life. It relates instead to a circumstance which could mess me up pretty badly if I live long enough. And there is surely no guarantee of that whatsoever. Heck, my best friends (my age) died several years ago, others (acquaintances near to my age) have been dead for years. No way I’m gonna live to 100. However:
I have been very fortunate with my health and I am extremely careful to avoid threats. Having good health has allowed me, today right now, to do stuff which many people my age left behind years ago. COVID-19 is the most serious threat to my health I ever have faced. As an older person with two pronounced comorbidities, I take that threat very, very seriously.
Anyone, regardless of age, who is not blessed with good health . . . is not in an advantageous situation.
The correct answer is <1%. And yes, it’s 10x lower than that if you get a vaccine.
Democrats are more likely to overstate hospitalization risks for unvaccinated people, which may fuel efforts, often led by Democratic Party leaders, to enforce both mask and vaccine mandates. At the same time, Republicans overstate risks to vaccinated people, leading to very low vaccine efficacy estimates. This may be one of the reasons that so many Republicans have been reluctant to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Previous research links these behavioral patterns to differences in information exposure. If so, vaccine acceptance is unlikely to significantly increase among Republicans until their trusted media or other information sources emphasize the benefits of vaccination
Said more bluntly perhaps, a majority of democrats are totally insane in their estimates of hospitalization risk (with over half thinking it’s >30% chances instead of 0.9%), and these people embolden crazy policies like vaccine mandates for people who already had covid or mask mandates for taking a walk outside not near anyone in particular.
Said more bluntly, it’s a tricky question and the majority of all people of all parties are totally insane because they got it wrong.
They were probably thinking the risk to unvaccinated compared to the vaccinated. I had to re-read the graph title multiple times before I understood what it was actually asking, and I happened to pick the right answer before I saw what you wrote. If I was asked this question with no clarification and little time to think, I probably would have gotten it wrong too.
Risk of death < 1%. Please point to a source of the <1% hospitalization figure.
This study from UK, for example, has 2.3% with alpha variant and 2.2% with Delta variant (and that was also out of a group that was 24% partly vaccinated and 2% fully vaccinated. Since those are at ~1 in 50 chance vs unvaccinated, that means for unvaccinated it’s around 3% from that study that were hospitalized). However, the delta variant hospitalizations were younger people, and estimate twice as likely from Delta than the Alpha.
I do find it hard to believe that anyone, let alone 41%, thinks over 50% of people who get covid require hospitalization. I fail to see how one could possibly reach that conclusion.
But this is a pretty good indication of who’s really being fed the misinformation. No wonder so many Democrats agree with the “prevent at all costs” mandates, when they think one of every two infected requires hospitalization.
When they’ve been convinced that half of everyone infected ends up in the hospital, of course they’re rushing to get vaccinated. If the risk were in fact anywhere close to that, virtually everyone would be. It is not.
And since the US as a whole is sitting at 56% on Sept 26, that chart is…cough cough…less than accurate. Unless there was a fourth category with a whole bunch of people at 0%. And, of course, I wasnt aware there was a way for a vaccinated person to become unvaccinated.
Wow! If your exactitude towards science or medicine halfway approached that of spelling, I might give your posts a second thought … okay … to be honest, a first thought.
Hear no evil, say no evil, think no evil? Vaccine criticism, banned on youtube for covid, now extends to any other vaccines.
YouTube will ban any videos that claim that commonly used vaccines approved by health authorities are ineffective or dangerous. The company previously blocked videos that made those claims about coronavirus vaccines, but not ones for other vaccines like those for measles or chickenpox.
Here’s a great writeup of how different journalists treated the incompetence of the CDC in their writing based on anti-Trump bias.
Gottlieb says the CDC refused to work with the HHS data and took their ball and went home. The Piller story has CDC people sobbing, angry, and saying “I refuse to do this.” Check. What differs is the interpretation and everything in Piller’s story is infected by an anti-Trump perspective. I don’t blame Piller for being anti-Trump but Trump plays no role in the story he just hovers in the background like a bogeyman.
Molnupiravir instead targets the viral polymerase, an enzyme needed for the virus to make copies of itself. It is designed to work by introducing errors into the genetic code of the virus.
Data show that the drug is most effective when given early in the course of infection, Merck said.
It’s almost like a known protease inhibitor might work well against this kind of virus if given early.
But I’m sure both Merck and Pfizer would agree it would not work if purchased over the counter in generic form. The nature of the large taxpayer funded prepurchase of these drugs, like the vaccines, is essential in ensuring patient compliance.
