The Z Machine
Footballguy
GLLLLLL, IK.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (8 Viewers)
- Thread starter Big League Chew
- Start date
ZADO
Footballguy
I walked into the HCA Florida Blake Hospital in Bradenton Fl to pick up a friend and when i walked in they had a box of masks on the reception counter. I noticed the 2 people behind the counter were in fact NOT wearing masks , so i asked if masks were optional and they yes , i further inquired ,''so i dont have to wear a mask?'' ,they said absolutely not .
So i didnt and i only saw 2 other people wearing masks , and one was a patient and the other a nurse .
I havent heard anything about Covid being an issue there . Take what you will from this , but id say they wouldnt risk not wearing masks if there was still a problem .I think its safe to breath unimpeded .
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
It was 102 before I took Tylenol and passed out for the night. Will test again. Maybe it’s a flu thing. Just weird timing.
I thought i just had heartburn from eating thai food for lunch sunday, but sleeping all day yesterday and obviously the fever say it’s something else.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
Catch-up quick: COVID-19
It’s been a few weeks since I’ve updated on COVID-19. Here’s the state of affairs. Surveillance SARS-CoV-2 continues to decline after a small Spring Break bump. Wastewater levels are the lowest they’ve been in over a year! Hospitalizations and deaths continue to decline as well, but we are still...
yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com
Doug B
Footballguy
Dr. Jetelina has tailed off her COVID blogs A LOT**. YLE slowing down the COVID talk has, for me, really added to the impression (right or wrong) that COVID is sociologically overwith.
I have a pet theory -- that I can't really prove hard with mathematics or anything -- that thanks to having three or so different major waves of COVID come through and thanks to the vaccinations that Americans have gotten ... the U.S. is very nearly immune from the worst end effects of the "ordinary" variants and mutations that COVID (like influenza) throws up with frequency. "Immune" is probably too strong a word ... more precisely "exceedingly resistant, to a decidedly uncommon degree worldwide".
An up-&-down mild undulation in case numbers derived ultimately from a variant-of-the-month that popped up in India or South Africa? Sure, that'll likely happen from time to time.
A society-changing variant causing a super super-spike in cases and infirmity and this truly affecting everyday life in the U.S.? Really hard to see how that can happen again in the near future. Yes, even with 2020-22 firmly in mind. Yes, even considering Delta and Omicron.
**still blogs plenty about other health stuff, though
I have a pet theory -- that I can't really prove hard with mathematics or anything -- that thanks to having three or so different major waves of COVID come through and thanks to the vaccinations that Americans have gotten ... the U.S. is very nearly immune from the worst end effects of the "ordinary" variants and mutations that COVID (like influenza) throws up with frequency. "Immune" is probably too strong a word ... more precisely "exceedingly resistant, to a decidedly uncommon degree worldwide".
An up-&-down mild undulation in case numbers derived ultimately from a variant-of-the-month that popped up in India or South Africa? Sure, that'll likely happen from time to time.
A society-changing variant causing a super super-spike in cases and infirmity and this truly affecting everyday life in the U.S.? Really hard to see how that can happen again in the near future. Yes, even with 2020-22 firmly in mind. Yes, even considering Delta and Omicron.
**still blogs plenty about other health stuff, though
Doug B
Footballguy
FDA clears the way for additional bivalent boosters for certain vulnerable individuals | CNN
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration amended the terms of its emergency use authorizations for the Pfizer and Moderna bivalent vaccines on Tuesday, allowing people ages 65 and older and certain people with weakened immunity to get additional doses before this fall's vaccination campaigns.
www.cnn.com
Plus, the original-flavor COVID vaccines are being phased out:
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
I forget who said it now... It wasn't YLE, maybe Topol? At any rate that person and a group of other docs/epidems were interviewed and after discussion they said the chances of another Omicron level event in the next 2-5 years was ~20%.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
New diabetes post-acute Covid (PASC, Long Covid), an inconvenient truth
A new study adds to 11 others for increased risk of Type 2 diabetes
erictopol.substack.com
Doug B
Footballguy
Do you recall roughly how long ago that was? Maybe the general consensus was more pessimistic in, say, mid-2022 versus today.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
Found it. It was last month.
A break from Covid waves and a breakthrough for preventing Long Covid
All indications from genomic surveillance of the virus, wastewater. and the clinical outcomes that are still being tracked (albeit more limited and less periodicity as time goes on), that we’ve (finally) entered an endemic phase (think smaller “wavelets”). There are no new SARS-CoV-2 variants...
erictopol.substack.com
When 10 scientists who are following the pandemic and the virus evolution closely (including me) were recently asked what are the odds of another Omicron event in the next 2 years, the range was 5-30%, with no one thinking it is zero, and good convergence at the 10-20% level (unpublished data). And that’s in the 2-year window. SARS-CoV-2 will be with us for many years, so over time that likelihood forecast for a Pi new family of variants (and beyond Pi) increases. There are too many routes for us to see evolution of a Pi family of variants as shown in the graphic below. That is why we must prioritize development and validation of next generation vaccines that can achieve variant-proof protection (e.g. against all betacoronaviruses) and have improved defense against infection that can be accomplished via mucosal immunity with oral or nasal vaccines.
The Commish
Footballguy
I don't know why they are so hesitant to come out and say what reality is. The reality is, for anyone who's had the suggested vaccinations they are basically in the endemic stage of this thing. For those that haven't been vaccinated, all bets are off if you catch it or catch it again. You're still living with the major health risks everyone else was living with prior to vaccine availability.
Scoresman
Footballguy
Did they ever determine how long the vaccines give good protection vs severe disease? We know that protection from just getting COVID wanes pretty quickly. I could see another Omicron peak happen if protection against severe disease drops off a cliff, combined with vaccine booster fatigue.
Doug B
Footballguy
At a societal level, there is something that helps prevent this protection from falling off a cliff, though -- the sheer ubiquity and transmissibility of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
In other words, for those who are interacting with the world much as they were pre-COVID ... almost everyone's immune system is getting frequently challenged over and over by COVID now. Just like it is with influenza, enteroviruses, rhinoviruses, etc. These challenges don't usually lead to symptomatic infection, but you don't need a detectable infection to have had a worthwhile immune response.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
If the primary benefit of the vaccines is to prevent serious illness, they certainly worked as advertised for me. I tested positive on Sunday afternoon. Monday and Tuesday felt like pretty much every chest cold I've ever had, with a little extra fatigue thrown in for spice. If I wasn't following a formal isolation protocol, I definitely would have gone back to work yesterday, and as far as I can tell I'm completely symptom-free today (Thursday).
Go science.
Go science.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
ACIP meeting: Spring booster Cliff notes
The ACIP meeting for spring boosters convened yesterday.
yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com
Doug B
Footballguy
ACIP meeting: Spring booster Cliff notes
The ACIP meeting for spring boosters convened yesterday.
Big takeaway:
Bottom line upfront
CDC and FDA are trying to simplify COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. (Verdict is out if they actually did this for kids). From now on, people are “up-to-date” if:
- 6+ years old: 1 bivalent (i.e. fall Omicron vaccine) dose. Regardless of vaccine history. Period.
- <6 years old:
- Moderna: at least 2 doses, including 1 bivalent.
- Pfizer:
- 5 years: 1 bivalent.
- Under 5 years: at least 3 doses, including 1 bivalent.
If you meet this criteria, there is nothing you need to do right now. You can stop reading.
But this happens to be only 1 in 6 Americans (2 in 5 of those who 65 years and older). A ridiculous number of Americans are not up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccines. This means a lot of people need to keep reading.
One thing I'd like to see a firm definition of what qualifies as "higher risk of severe COVID" (see charts in middle of YLE article).
Once again ignoring people who actually got covid since the bivalent vaccines were introduced.ACIP meeting: Spring booster Cliff notes
The ACIP meeting for spring boosters convened yesterday.
Big takeaway:
Bottom line upfront
CDC and FDA are trying to simplify COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. (Verdict is out if they actually did this for kids). From now on, people are “up-to-date” if:
- 6+ years old: 1 bivalent (i.e. fall Omicron vaccine) dose. Regardless of vaccine history. Period.
- <6 years old:
- Moderna: at least 2 doses, including 1 bivalent.
- Pfizer:
- 5 years: 1 bivalent.
- Under 5 years: at least 3 doses, including 1 bivalent.
If you meet this criteria, there is nothing you need to do right now. You can stop reading.But this happens to be only 1 in 6 Americans (2 in 5 of those who 65 years and older). A ridiculous number of Americans are not up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccines. This means a lot of people need to keep reading.
One thing I'd like to see a firm definition of what qualifies as "higher risk of severe COVID" (see charts in middle of YLE article).
Also, this
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
ACIP meeting: Spring booster Cliff notes
The ACIP meeting for spring boosters convened yesterday.
Big takeaway:
Bottom line upfront
CDC and FDA are trying to simplify COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. (Verdict is out if they actually did this for kids). From now on, people are “up-to-date” if:
- 6+ years old: 1 bivalent (i.e. fall Omicron vaccine) dose. Regardless of vaccine history. Period.
- <6 years old:
- Moderna: at least 2 doses, including 1 bivalent.
- Pfizer:
- 5 years: 1 bivalent.
- Under 5 years: at least 3 doses, including 1 bivalent.
If you meet this criteria, there is nothing you need to do right now. You can stop reading.But this happens to be only 1 in 6 Americans (2 in 5 of those who 65 years and older). A ridiculous number of Americans are not up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccines. This means a lot of people need to keep reading.
One thing I'd like to see a firm definition of what qualifies as "higher risk of severe COVID" (see charts in middle of YLE article).
My kids got "fully vaccinated" last spring. Then had Covid in May (and one kid again in October), so neither got another shot. Will revisit in the fall I guess before school.
Scoresman
Footballguy
ACIP meeting: Spring booster Cliff notes
The ACIP meeting for spring boosters convened yesterday.
Big takeaway:
Bottom line upfront
CDC and FDA are trying to simplify COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. (Verdict is out if they actually did this for kids). From now on, people are “up-to-date” if:
- 6+ years old: 1 bivalent (i.e. fall Omicron vaccine) dose. Regardless of vaccine history. Period.
- <6 years old:
- Moderna: at least 2 doses, including 1 bivalent.
- Pfizer:
- 5 years: 1 bivalent.
- Under 5 years: at least 3 doses, including 1 bivalent.
If you meet this criteria, there is nothing you need to do right now. You can stop reading.But this happens to be only 1 in 6 Americans (2 in 5 of those who 65 years and older). A ridiculous number of Americans are not up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccines. This means a lot of people need to keep reading.
One thing I'd like to see a firm definition of what qualifies as "higher risk of severe COVID" (see charts in middle of YLE article).
You forgot "VAXXINE CASUES STROKES. TAKE THAT VAXX BROS"
Doug B
Footballguy
Someone in her position is never, ever, going to say something like "Since you had COVID in the spring, you don't need a COVID booster in the fall". That's not how flu vaccination recommendations work, either. Recommendations for an annual prophylactic vaccine (so far as I'm aware) is always once-a-year like clockwork, infections notwithstanding.
@Terminalxylem , @gianmarco -- inviting your input on this point.
I read this post 3 times and I still don't understand what it is saying.ACIP meeting: Spring booster Cliff notes
The ACIP meeting for spring boosters convened yesterday.
Big takeaway:
Bottom line upfront
CDC and FDA are trying to simplify COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. (Verdict is out if they actually did this for kids). From now on, people are “up-to-date” if:
- 6+ years old: 1 bivalent (i.e. fall Omicron vaccine) dose. Regardless of vaccine history. Period.
- <6 years old:
- Moderna: at least 2 doses, including 1 bivalent.
- Pfizer:
- 5 years: 1 bivalent.
- Under 5 years: at least 3 doses, including 1 bivalent.
If you meet this criteria, there is nothing you need to do right now. You can stop reading.But this happens to be only 1 in 6 Americans (2 in 5 of those who 65 years and older). A ridiculous number of Americans are not up-to-date with COVID-19 vaccines. This means a lot of people need to keep reading.
One thing I'd like to see a firm definition of what qualifies as "higher risk of severe COVID" (see charts in middle of YLE article).
Doug B
Footballguy
Doesn't move the needle for me -- too far from anything definitive. I am a bit disappointed in Dr. Jetelina's equivocacy there -- just say more data is needed to either tease out effects or else rule them out.
Besides, it looks like all that has to be done IF there is an "elevated stroke risk" is simply separate your flu and COVID vaccinations by a few weeks. It wasn't a purported "elevated stroke risk" simply from the COVID vaccine alone -- it was from a combo of the flu and COVID vaccines administered together. Furthermore, whatever artifact was in the data was limited in time -- if there were any effect, it wasn't showing up in the data past 21 days.
Doug B
Footballguy
Ask away.
What are the current recommendations for vaccine boosters?
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
What is Canada's route?
No idea.
Doug B
Footballguy
One booster annually, typically falling ~12 months after your last one. Pretty much the flu vaccination schedule.
Doug B
Footballguy
She goes into it in the Comments section (aside: I've gotten almost as much from reading her Comments sections as from her original articles). Note this strictly addresses a question about the additional booster elderly Americans are eligible for right now (as opposed to addressing the general annual vaccine recommendations for all adults):
| Susan Scheid 3 hr ago Thanks, as always, for the clear, concise summation. Two questions: For those of us over 65+ who have had recent infections, you note you agree with Canada’s approach. Van you advise what that is, and specifically, what waiting period is recommended? Re the stroke issue related to taking the flu and Covid vaxes at the same time, have you any sense of when the CDC will have guidance on this, and is there or will there be any recommendation as to how far apart and in what order the two vaxes should be taken? |
 | Katelyn Jetelina 3 hr agoAuthor These are good questions. 1. I meant to link the Canada policy, but forgot! Sorry. Here it is: https://www.canada.ca/en/public-hea...ls-high-risk-severe-illness-due-covid-19.html Basically they said everyone over the age of 80 needs a vaccine (regardless of infection status). For those 65-79 years old, they don't need a Spring booster if they EVER had an infection because hybrid immunity is showing to last at least 12 months. They didn't provide a time frame, because I don't think we know. So, I always use the 6 month rule. 2. During the CDC meeting, the scientists said they were confident there wasn't a safety signal. I was surprised not much was discussed about this, because usually we don't only rely on statistics, especially when it's so close to being significant. They did say they are looking into other data sources to try and understand this better. |
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
They probably use the CDCs list of high risk conditions
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
You are correct. It's a little trickier with covid than flu though, as it hasn't established clear seasonality yet. And the overall potential for mutation is higher, despite the SARS-CoV-2 mutation rate being slower than influenza.
They probably should add a caveat like "one can (should?) wait a few mos after recent covid infection before booster vaccination" - that type of verbiage already exists regarding prior vaccine doses. But the general public likely isn't sophisticated enough for that level of nuance. Most healthcare providers are, so they can help with timing.
Doug B
Footballguy
Thought this was interesting -- from the 4/25 YLE article "Do I Need a Spring Booster":
Level of urgency
I also knew that the wastewater counts have been dropping for a few months now, but it's interesting to me when someone at the vanguard of COVID monitoring/response uses the verb "nosediving". Dr. Jetelina has incentive to soft-pedal America's return to normality and offer hedges ("... the next variant could come at any time!"), and yet she consciously declined to do so here. If things are normalizing, she seems to say, then so be it -- it's OK to continue to distance American society from pandemic footing. Sometimes, it's the things left unsaid that convey the most information.
Level of urgency
The level of urgency for a spring booster should be dependent on two things:
1. Risk factors. Ninety percent of people in the hospital “for” or “with” COVID-19 do not have a bivalent vaccine (i.e. fall booster). This group has the highest level of urgency.
...
If you had the fall booster, you’re in pretty good shape against acute severe disease. Will this change with time? We don’t know. The U.S. (and a handful of other countries) don’t want to risk finding out, so a spring booster is “permissible”.
People in the hospital today for COVID-19 are older adults and/or those with a comorbidity. (If you want to know why, read more here.) This means groups with the second highest level of urgency for a spring booster are those with a fall booster and:
- Adults over 75 years;
- Adults over the age of 65 years with a comorbidity; and,
- Moderate or severely immunocompromised.
If you’re not in one of these groups, your level of urgency is significantly reduced. You could time a booster for maximum protection. If I were over 65 without a comorbidity, I would, especially since wastewater concentration is nosediving.
The parts in red are the newsworthy parts. I figured skipping the fall 2022 bivalent booster increased one's risk of severe illness, but I hadn't seen it put to numbers yet.I also knew that the wastewater counts have been dropping for a few months now, but it's interesting to me when someone at the vanguard of COVID monitoring/response uses the verb "nosediving". Dr. Jetelina has incentive to soft-pedal America's return to normality and offer hedges ("... the next variant could come at any time!"), and yet she consciously declined to do so here. If things are normalizing, she seems to say, then so be it -- it's OK to continue to distance American society from pandemic footing. Sometimes, it's the things left unsaid that convey the most information.
Doug B
Footballguy
(Old post from 1/25/2022):
Today, on Thur 4/27/2023, using 7-day averages:
As a point of comparison, the 2023 high was 590 on January 15, 2023. The downwards slide since then has been consistent.
Today, on Thur 4/27/2023, using 7-day averages:
- - The U.S. has been below 300 COVID deaths/day, sustained, since March 7, 2023
- - The U.S. has been below 200 COVID deaths/day, sustained, since April 8, 2023
- - The U.S. has been below 150 COVID deaths/day, sustained, since April 12, 2023
As a point of comparison, the 2023 high was 590 on January 15, 2023. The downwards slide since then has been consistent.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
Which map are you finding that on? I was looking at Daily Deaths, but I can't make that one produce your 590 number for 1/15 or the 150 for 4/12.
Doug B
Footballguy
Scroll down to the graph "Daily New Deaths in the United States". Click OFF 'Daily Deaths' at the bottom and click ON '7-day moving average'. Put your cursor directly on the brown line, right at the January 2023 peak.
ZADO
Footballguy
Dr. Aseem Malhotra tells Joe Rogan that a reanalysis of Pfizer and Moderna's original clinical trial data shows that their COVID mRNA vaccines *INCREASE* your risks of serious adverse events, hospitalization, and death: "In my whole career, looking at all of the drugs and knowing about many different prescribed medications, I've never seen something that when you look at the data has such poor effectiveness and unprecedented harms. In the summer of last year, in the journal Vaccine, the highest-impact medical journal for vaccines, they published a reanalysis of Pfizer and Moderna's original double-blinded randomized controlled trial. This is the highest quality of scientific evidence. Joseph Fraiman is an ER doctor and clinical data scientist from Louisiana. Associate editor of the BMJ, Dr. Peter Doshi. Dr. Robert Kaplan from Stanford. Some real eminence of integrity published this reanalysis, and what they found was this. In the trials that led to the approval of regulators worldwide, you were more likely to suffer a severe adverse event from taking the vaccine, hospitalization, disability, or life-changing event than you were to be hospitalized with COVID. This mRNA vaccine should likely have never been approved for a single human in the first place, and that rate of serious adverse events is at least 1 in 800... 1 in 800 is a very, very high figure. We've pulled other vaccines for much less. The 1976 Swine Flu vaccine was pulled because it was found to cause a debilitating neurological condition called Guillan-Barre syndrome in about 1 in 100,000 people. The Rotavirus vaccine was suspended in 1999 because it was found to cause a form of bowel obstruction in kids in 1 of 10,000. This is at least 1 in 800. It's a no-brainer. So the question is, why have we not paused it?"
gianmarco
Footballguy
Debunked as usual
And part of the article directly addressing this:
Reanalysis of clinical trial data from Pfizer and Moderna
One of the main pieces of evidence in the article is a study published by Fraiman et al. in the journal Vaccine[1]. In it, the authors analyzed data from a previous study of adverse events reported in the clinical trials of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines[2,3]. They concluded that “The excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group” in both Pfizer and Moderna trials.To arrive at this conclusion, the authors calculated how many more serious adverse events occurred in the vaccinated group compared to the control group. They then compared this figure with the number of people hospitalized with COVID-19 during the clinical trials.
To determine what kind of adverse events would be considered as serious for the purposes of the study, the authors looked to the Priority List of COVID-19 Adverse events of special interest by the Brighton Collaboration (BC), a program of the nonprofit organization The Task Force for Global Health. This list includes adverse events that have been seen with COVID-19, as well as those with a proven or theoretical association with vaccines in general or with specific vaccine platforms.
The now-published study was initially available as a preprint—a manuscript that hasn’t undergone peer review—in June 2022. Health Feedback previously reviewed it and found that the authors’ analysis didn’t support their conclusion. Scientists such as surgeon and cancer researcher David Gorski, biostatistician Jeffrey S. Morris, and nanomedicine expert Susan Oliver pointed out several issues in the study that indicated potential p-hacking.
P-hacking (also known as data dredging or data snooping) is the manipulation of data analysis to make the results look statistically significant when they aren’t. The study by Fraiman et al. showed several signs suggesting that the authors had analyzed data in a manner that favored their hypothesis.
First, the Brighton document lists “adverse events of special interest” (AESI) mainly as specific clinical diagnoses, such as enteritis/colitis, arthritis, and encephalitis. In order for the authors to count the number of serious AESIs associated with COVID-19 vaccines, they needed to determine which serious adverse events (SAEs) recorded in the vaccines’ clinical trials corresponded to the AESIs listed in the Brighton document.
The decision of whether an SAE corresponded to a Brighton AESI rested on the opinion of two independent clinicians, and a third one if the first two disagreed without arriving at a consensus.
However, the reasons for considering certain SAEs as corresponding to the AESI list are unclear and inconsistent. For example, one Brighton AESI is enteritis/colitis, for which the corresponding adverse events would be diarrhea and vomiting. However, the authors included diarrhea but not vomiting when counting relevant SAEs. Another example is the authors’ inclusion of arthritis as a serious adverse event, but not osteoarthritis (a form of arthritis).
The authors also excluded “events related to COVID-19”. While this exclusion could make sense when focusing on potential side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines, it introduces an important bias by eliminating adverse events that are expected to be much more common in the control group than in the vaccinated group. This means that the study was less able to detect harms from COVID-19. Overall, these observations suggest that the adverse events that the authors chose to analyze were the result of cherry-picking.
Second, the authors compared the people hospitalized with COVID-19 with the total number of adverse events in the control and the vaccinated groups rather than the number of individuals who reported the adverse events. Since one person can suffer multiple adverse events but only one hospitalization, this analysis leads to an overcounting of adverse events and over-represents the harmful effects of vaccination compared to the risks of COVID-19. For example, a person who reported colitis, diarrhea, and abdominal pain, would be counted as three adverse events, even though the three occurred in the same person and are likely related.
Finally, some of the included adverse events, such as diarrhea, abdominal pain, and rash, aren’t equivalent to a COVID-19 hospitalization in terms of disease severity. This analysis also doesn’t take into account the benefits of vaccination in preventing COVID-19 complications other than hospitalization, including cardiovascular problems.
Given the methodological flaws in the study, the analysis is unreliable and doesn’t support the claim that vaccines cause more serious adverse events than the benefits they provide.
ZADO
Footballguy
blah blah blah
The Commish
Footballguy
quality stuff in here 
nirad3
Footballguy
Anectodical at best but traveled again last week. Mask usage between OC Cali ==> Minneapolis ==> Grand Forks and back the same way... probably 5%, maybe less.
Was sitting at gate at MSP on flight home... some guy comes and sits next to a lady across from me with his mask perfectly positioned on his chin. She cleared her throat once and he moved it up over his nose/mouth.
Was sitting at gate at MSP on flight home... some guy comes and sits next to a lady across from me with his mask perfectly positioned on his chin. She cleared her throat once and he moved it up over his nose/mouth.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
That’s terrible, considering the potential for aerosolized fecal matter during that procedure.
nirad3
Footballguy
Yeah in many doctor/hospital settings I could see wearing a mask for sure.
Lmao I'm not talking about DURING the procedure
fatness
Footballguy
Well then that first post was a bit misleading.
you guys really thought he meant during the procedure too?
top dog
Footballguy
I hope you don't remember the actual procedure. Lol. When I had one I told the nurse that gave me the drugs to put you in "twilight land" or whatever that "I was a bigger dude and she was probably gonna need to double that dose up." She just laughed at me and we started turning the corner to go down the hallway to the OR. The next thing I know I woke up in recovery. Just the way I WANTED to remember that procedure.
Dragons
Delusions of Grandeur
As usual, great info from YLE. This time on nasal vaccines
yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com
Hype or hope? Nasal COVID-19 vaccines
Five billion dollars was just allocated to Operation Next Gen with one goal: speed the creation of next-generation COVID-19 vaccines and therapies, including nasal (mucosal) vaccines. I advocated for this at the White House, but it’s going to be a hard road.
yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I was just at the doctor yesterday for my annual check-up. Everybody who was actually interacting directly with patients (my doctor, her nurse, the guy who drew my blood) were wearing masks. Almost nobody else was, including the receptionists. There were just a single-digit number of masked patients, but I have no idea what's up with those folks -- for all I know they're actually sick and contagious and/or immunocompromised somehow, and of course it makes sense for those people to mask up when they come in for care.
This seems reasonable to me. If I were working around sick people all the time, maybe I would re-think wearing a mask. It makes sense to me that this might be one of the very few places where masking "sticks."
