Coronavirus and You - Page 497

On October 13 2021 22:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:




Whether or not something is defined as a booster is not based on how much later the follow-up dose is received, because the second dose (and in some cases, especially with some immunocompromised individuals who can receive the vaccine, an additional third dose) is part of the initial regiment / full course of the initial vaccine, to make sure the vaccine is completely effective.

It's the difference between "the vaccine has been effective for a while, but its efficacy is starting to wane" (so a booster is needed get it back up to the effectiveness it used to be at) and "the shot(s) we gave are not providing the expected efficacy, so we're going to give another one to get it up to where it should be" (this is a second/third/non-booster dose). In the latter scenario, the individuals are not considered "fully vaccinated" until they've had their second/third dose.

Here's more information on the difference:

"Is a third dose the same thing as a booster dose?
No. A booster is given to people who got a full course of a vaccine and developed a good response. For some vaccines, antibodies and other aspects of a person’s initially strong immune response start to decrease (or wane) over time. When that happens, people are offered booster doses to pump their immune response back to previous levels.

Unlike boosters, third/additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines are for people who received the complete starter series of vaccines but then their immune systems didn’t have a good enough response. Evidence shows these are generally people whose immune systems are weaker. That’s why the FDA and CDC are recommending an additional dose for immunocompromised individuals."

https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/third-doses-and-covid-booster-shots

I hope that helps clarify the difference

On October 13 2021 21:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:


I know you've already acknowledged that the United States is in a very different political/media situation than Norway, but I feel like it makes sense to focus on things from the American perspective, because if 91% of Americans were scientifically literate and medically trusting, these sorts of conversations wouldn't need to exist in the first place.

I think it'd be great if we could figure out ways to build up trust with anti-vaxxers, but being transparent, honest, and cautious are not getting through to a significant percentage of Americans. When a scientist makes a prediction and then publicly admits to being wrong, half the country doesn't appreciate that transparency or honesty; they see it as proof that scientists can't be trusted, because the scientist was wrong about one thing and therefore why should we trust them about the next thing? Even if the scientist is right about something, they could have gotten lucky and that doesn't mean they'll necessarily be trustworthy the next time around. It's all about cherry-picking whatever interpretation fits their narrative, and it's not like most Americans are choosing to a deep dive into the peer-reviewed literature on a topic, instead of listening to whatever media outlet they prefer anyway.

I think attempting open communication should always be tried first (i.e., at an individual level, asking someone why they don't want the covid vaccine, because their reason might be different from someone else's), because being able to empathize with a person you disagree with can build a strong rapport which makes both sides receptive to alternative opinions... but when good-faith conversations are drowned out by Fox News or the countless other anti-vax / conspiratorial sites that act as a perfect echo chamber for people who feel some kind of way, it's depressingly difficult. And given the seriously infectious nature of coronavirus, we can't wait for millions of people to maybe, someday, be convinced to get vaccinated in a few years when they have a come-to-Jesus moment.

If attempts at communication and persuasion and education aren't immediately working, we're unfortunately left with the alternatives that can pragmatically, efficiently, and quickly work, which includes negative, inconvenient consequences for people who are unwilling to get vaccinated, like coercing them to get vaccinated. And can this erode trust even further? Sure, but by then, it was clear that trust wasn't going to happen anyway, and at least now they're less likely to get themselves and other people sick. I want people to trust me, but I'd rather have them not trust me than them accidentally hurt someone I care about. It's not an ideal route, but at some point, you might need to drag some of the dissenters kicking and screaming into doing what's right, even if they don't like it, and that's historically been necessary (e.g., putting civil rights into law, whether or not 91% of people were on board with respecting those disenfranchised demographics).

On October 15 2021 02:58 JimmiC wrote:

We went there and now are back. If vaccination rates are high, spread is low, and especially in situations where people are showing proof of vaccination and negative tests, I don't see why they wouldn't.


Here it is kind of strange because we had mask mandates and then I'd go to walmart and like 80-90% of people would be wearing them. And then we "fully opened" with our Premier swearing to god we would never have any more measures. It got worse than it had ever been, ICU's busting at the seams, federal aid and so on and we went to a vaccine passport (Which he also promised would never happen), limits on some gatherings and mask mandate came back. The last two times I've been shopping, once right before our thanksgiving so it was really busy, there was 100% mask usage. And I didn't even see anyone with it below their nose or around their chin. I don't think enforcement has ramped up, and my facebook has not changed so I'm not sure why the compliance is so much better? I expected it to be worse with how frustrated the non-vaxxmask people have always bene and how much angrier the pro vacc and public health measure people have been.

Also, his popularity is currently at 22%, he's a conservative and since 1971 we have had one none Conservative Premier (they used be called the progressive conservatives but joined with another conservative party to become the United conservative party). I think it is record breaking low.

On October 15 2021 03:41 Slydie wrote:


Do you have some numbers to link? According to worldometers, the Delta wave did not seem very dramatic for Canada compared to previous ones.

Also, masks and vaccines are 2 very different things. Norway has essentially been "anti mask" the whole pandemic, and it is very hard to spot if it actually hurt them in any area.