|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On December 18 2021 02:10 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 01:57 LegalLord wrote:On December 18 2021 00:34 Simberto wrote:On December 18 2021 00:32 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2021 00:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Sounds like they should get more ICU beds. Again, the limit is almost never the amount of physical beds but the personal to care for patients. "Just get more beds" is not a thing. Pretty sure that that is what is implied when someone says "get more beds". I doubt that anyone thinks that the main thing needed is the literal bed. Yeah, that. We talked through the details of how to address the key shortages (mostly labor, it seems) just a few pages back. A clearly better solution than holding society hostage to "number of ICU beds available" when the cause of said shortage is highly solvable. Where in the discussion did it become highly solvable? Like it is years from now and if money is not an option. Or you know you could just have a whole bunch less people end up in the ICU, and save tons of money and human suffering.
An option that is available is to graduate the current class of medical professionals a semester early. It would give a significant boost to the labor available at the cost of quality short term. The time to make an emergency decision like that is now that the semester is ending. Needs must when the devil drives. they may not be fully qualified but it would be a lot better than to welcome back staff that doesn't belive in the profession they practice.
|
On December 18 2021 04:57 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 04:47 Sadist wrote:On December 18 2021 04:31 maybenexttime wrote:
On Wednesday I was in close contact with someone who has tested positive today. It was a squash tournament with a few drinks afterwards. He tested negative on Wednesday before the tournament (we were asked to do a lateral flow test) and the next day, but he was supposed to fly home for Christmas today and tested positive before the flight.
Does anyone know if a PCR test will tell me if I got infected? I had my booster yesterday, so I have the usual post-vaccine symptoms. For the record, my mom is unvaccinated, which is why I am strongly considering cancelling my flight, unless there's a way to rule out my getting infected. Here in the US i have been told if you get tested before 5-7 days since contact you can get a false negative. Better to wait at least 5 days since contact unless you have symptoms. I've been told that about the lateral flow tests. PCR tests, from what I've read, work by amplifying the sample's viral matter. They can be used to determine at what stage of the infection you are based on how many cycles were needed to reach a certain level of amplified viral matter. I'm just not sure how sensitive they as, considering this would be the very beginning of the infection process for me. My flight is on Monday, which makes this situation more tricky. Ironically, if I cancel my flight because of this, maybe it'll nudge my mom to get vaccinated...
I mean the risk is ultimately up to you, because omicron can pretty much spread anywhere and to anyone. She'll survive not seeing you for Christmas, but she might not survive Covid if you bring it.
Granted with how Omicron is looking, every single person who isn't a hermit is going to catch it over the next month or two. No way to avoid it with how infectious it is. Whether she catches it from you or from going to the grocery store might not end up mattering, so it could be your last chance to see her either way. It's a brutal choice, not one I'd want to make in your place.
|
On December 18 2021 05:08 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 02:10 JimmiC wrote:On December 18 2021 01:57 LegalLord wrote:On December 18 2021 00:34 Simberto wrote:On December 18 2021 00:32 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2021 00:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Sounds like they should get more ICU beds. Again, the limit is almost never the amount of physical beds but the personal to care for patients. "Just get more beds" is not a thing. Pretty sure that that is what is implied when someone says "get more beds". I doubt that anyone thinks that the main thing needed is the literal bed. Yeah, that. We talked through the details of how to address the key shortages (mostly labor, it seems) just a few pages back. A clearly better solution than holding society hostage to "number of ICU beds available" when the cause of said shortage is highly solvable. Where in the discussion did it become highly solvable? Like it is years from now and if money is not an option. Or you know you could just have a whole bunch less people end up in the ICU, and save tons of money and human suffering. An option that is available is to graduate the current class of medical professionals a semester early. It would give a significant boost to the labor available at the cost of quality short term. The time to make an emergency decision like that is now that the semester is ending. Needs must when the devil drives. they may not be fully qualified but it would be a lot better than to welcome back staff that doesn't belive in the profession they practice.
As a third category of available workers, there's also the people who quit/retired due to adverse working conditions who could come back if things were different.
Some of these people left the field but could probably be incentivized to come back. Would definitely be difficult for shitty hospitals and their ability to squeeze margins, but I'm not sure I value that over having hospitals staffed well enough to avoid the self-inflicted "not enough ICU beds" problem.
|
On December 18 2021 05:41 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 05:08 Sermokala wrote:On December 18 2021 02:10 JimmiC wrote:On December 18 2021 01:57 LegalLord wrote:On December 18 2021 00:34 Simberto wrote:On December 18 2021 00:32 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2021 00:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Sounds like they should get more ICU beds. Again, the limit is almost never the amount of physical beds but the personal to care for patients. "Just get more beds" is not a thing. Pretty sure that that is what is implied when someone says "get more beds". I doubt that anyone thinks that the main thing needed is the literal bed. Yeah, that. We talked through the details of how to address the key shortages (mostly labor, it seems) just a few pages back. A clearly better solution than holding society hostage to "number of ICU beds available" when the cause of said shortage is highly solvable. Where in the discussion did it become highly solvable? Like it is years from now and if money is not an option. Or you know you could just have a whole bunch less people end up in the ICU, and save tons of money and human suffering. An option that is available is to graduate the current class of medical professionals a semester early. It would give a significant boost to the labor available at the cost of quality short term. The time to make an emergency decision like that is now that the semester is ending. Needs must when the devil drives. they may not be fully qualified but it would be a lot better than to welcome back staff that doesn't belive in the profession they practice. As a third category of available workers, there's also the people who quit/retired due to adverse working conditions who could come back if things were different. Some of these people left the field but could probably be incentivized to come back. Would definitely be difficult for shitty hospitals and their ability to squeeze margins, but I'm not sure I value that over having hospitals staffed well enough to avoid the self-inflicted "not enough ICU beds" problem.
I don't understand what your proposing. Either you mandate that the hospitals better conditions and pay or you give them the money to do so. It would be impossible to get republicans to care about people so that's not a realistic option.
|
On December 18 2021 06:15 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 05:41 LegalLord wrote:On December 18 2021 05:08 Sermokala wrote:On December 18 2021 02:10 JimmiC wrote:On December 18 2021 01:57 LegalLord wrote:On December 18 2021 00:34 Simberto wrote:On December 18 2021 00:32 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2021 00:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Sounds like they should get more ICU beds. Again, the limit is almost never the amount of physical beds but the personal to care for patients. "Just get more beds" is not a thing. Pretty sure that that is what is implied when someone says "get more beds". I doubt that anyone thinks that the main thing needed is the literal bed. Yeah, that. We talked through the details of how to address the key shortages (mostly labor, it seems) just a few pages back. A clearly better solution than holding society hostage to "number of ICU beds available" when the cause of said shortage is highly solvable. Where in the discussion did it become highly solvable? Like it is years from now and if money is not an option. Or you know you could just have a whole bunch less people end up in the ICU, and save tons of money and human suffering. An option that is available is to graduate the current class of medical professionals a semester early. It would give a significant boost to the labor available at the cost of quality short term. The time to make an emergency decision like that is now that the semester is ending. Needs must when the devil drives. they may not be fully qualified but it would be a lot better than to welcome back staff that doesn't belive in the profession they practice. As a third category of available workers, there's also the people who quit/retired due to adverse working conditions who could come back if things were different. Some of these people left the field but could probably be incentivized to come back. Would definitely be difficult for shitty hospitals and their ability to squeeze margins, but I'm not sure I value that over having hospitals staffed well enough to avoid the self-inflicted "not enough ICU beds" problem. I don't understand what your proposing. Either you mandate that the hospitals better conditions and pay or you give them the money to do so. It would be impossible to get republicans to care about people so that's not a realistic option.
Yeah, one of those would do nicely.
|
|
|
Just over a week after Australia officially reduced the booster wait period from six months to five months the state of NSW is now seriously looking into shortening it again to four months.I should also note the chief health minister in NSW Brad Hazzard stated last week he would like to see it at 3 months, as in the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/17/nsw-considers-shortening-covid-booster-shot-interval-to-four-months-as-omicron-spreads?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
New South Wales health officials are considering breaking with commonwealth advice by shortening the Covid vaccine booster interval to four months, amid concern about spread of the Omicron variant.
Guardian Australia understands that NSW health department officials were meeting with vaccine providers in the state on Friday and canvassing the prospect of how they would cope with an influx of people eager to be vaccinated ahead of schedule.
Going to be interesting to see if people are willing to be jabbed every 3-4 months in order to have a job and have access to basic things they took for granted two years ago.The booster was originally sold as being like the flu jab but it’s becoming increasingly clear that this won’t be a once yearly thing.
Three months is where it appears to be headed in my opinion but an expert advisory panel here OzSage went so far as recommending the booster two months after the second shot so who knows.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
I am willing to get jabbed every 3-4 months to be safe against an ongoing pandemic. My booster shot barely had any bad reactions, so it is literally just walking to the doctor and having a slight muscle ache for a day, similar to what you get after going to the gym.
I don't see why you link that with "having a job" and other similar things. I don't get a booster to be able to do the things i need a booster certificate for, i get a booster because there is a fucking ongoing pandemic and i like to be as protected as possible.
|
Not to mention the fact that at least in the UK it's the minimum recommended gap.
|
Frankly, on a personal level, people getting multiple jabs is less important than the government and companies cutting down in-person processes. When more things are done remotely, there's even less likelihood to make contact with strangers and get infected.
At work, I still have to deal with stuff over the counter. Stuff that can easily be done electronically. Instead of just mandating all workers to get jabbed, why not take the further step to eliminate physical processing as much as possible?
Part of the reason why cases are still high even in places with high vaccination rates is because everyone tries to rush back to normal life. Vaccination is of paramount importance, yes. But don't treat it as a license to give up on all other precautionary measures, and above all, common sense.
|
It does seem to be that the only people that have a problem with getting a booster every 6 months, that think that making it seem like the minimum time will be the regular schedule makes it worse, are the ones who didn't get it in the first place or have some delusion about it's negative effects that they think others share.
|
On December 18 2021 22:44 Sermokala wrote:
It does seem to be that the only people that have a problem with getting a booster every 6 months, that think that making it seem like the minimum time will be the regular schedule makes it worse, are the ones who didn't get it in the first place or have some delusion about it's negative effects that they think others share.
Most of my crossfit friends had 1-3 days of sore arm/felt bad after their 3rd shot; and they are healthier than 99.9% of the population. To them, or to me for that matter, getting a booster every 3-6 months is simply not worth it and I will def not do it. Politically I also feel very politically compelled to not get any boosters.
Disclaimer: I am extremely healthy and 30 y/o, I understand the risks of covid and accept them.
|
Northern Ireland25951 Posts
On December 18 2021 22:44 Sermokala wrote:
It does seem to be that the only people that have a problem with getting a booster every 6 months, that think that making it seem like the minimum time will be the regular schedule makes it worse, are the ones who didn't get it in the first place or have some delusion about it's negative effects that they think others share.
I’m assuming it gives more leeway in distribution, not everyone will want it ASAP, but those who do can and it creates a wider overall window.
I’m sure we all know some people who are debilitatingly anxious about Covid, the yin to the antivaxxer yang if you will that we don’t tend to discuss in this thread, for those folks the sooner the better in assuaging their fears.
Maybe I will be spectacularly wrong and the hypothesised scenario of quarterly mandatory boosters is where we end up, but a mere option to get an earlier booster I don’t think necessarily leads there.
|
On December 18 2021 23:35 GoTuNk! wrote:
Politically I also feel very politically compelled to not get any boosters. What does that even mean?
ps.
No one gives a shit about how healthy you are or if you don't care about the risk to you personally. But this is something that effects everyone, you know the whole infectious disease spreading pandemic thing.
|
Those crossfit guys had a sore arm for 1-3 days? Horrible! That is definitely not worth protecting other human beings from severe disease and/or death. No way.
|
|
|
On December 18 2021 23:35 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 22:44 Sermokala wrote:
It does seem to be that the only people that have a problem with getting a booster every 6 months, that think that making it seem like the minimum time will be the regular schedule makes it worse, are the ones who didn't get it in the first place or have some delusion about it's negative effects that they think others share. Most of my crossfit friends had 1-3 days of sore arm/felt bad after their 3rd shot; and they are healthier than 99.9% of the population. To them, or to me for that matter, getting a booster every 3-6 months is simply not worth it and I will def not do it. Politically I also feel very politically compelled to not get any boosters. Disclaimer: I am extremely healthy and 30 y/o, I understand the risks of covid and accept them.
I don't know the exercise schedule of your friends, but given that people often rotate different exercises / muscle groups each day, and occasionally take a day off to rest the body, would *not* being able to work out the vaccinated arm (due to soreness) for a single day, and *not* being able to train for maybe 1-2 extra days really be that disruptive to one's training regiment?
(And this doesn't even include the fact that 1-3 days of soreness is wayyy less disruptive than actually getting covid, which would make you feel much worse than the vaccine, and for at least two or three times as many days, too. Getting covid would likely cancel one's training for at least a week, and potentially have lingering, long-term side effects (like breathing issues) that could even permanently handicap someone's daily gym experiences. I would think that those booster shots would be a no-brainer for someone who likes to exercise, especially if they're going to be in public gyms every day, sharing space and equipment.)
Edit: I, too, am curious about what is meant by "Politically I also feel very politically compelled to not get any boosters."
|
On December 18 2021 23:49 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 23:35 GoTuNk! wrote:
Politically I also feel very politically compelled to not get any boosters. What does that even mean? ps. No one gives a shit about how healthy you are or if you don't care about the risk to you personally. But this is something that effects everyone, you know the whole infectious disease spreading pandemic thing.
Maybe he identifies politically as a selfish asshole. ;-)
|
I think it's very bad that politicians talk in this pandemic. Way more than scientists. I also don't like when I see a CEO of vaccine producer talking about the need to vaccinate with a third dose.
Three weeks ago we didn't even know the omicron mutation existed. Now the politicians know that we need a third dose to protect us? Really wish some scientific data on this. Though this variant is so recent, I doubt there are any data. We don't even know if it causes more severe disease than delta yet.
|
On December 19 2021 02:25 arbiter_md wrote:
I think it's very bad that politicians talk in this pandemic. Way more than scientists. I also don't like when I see a CEO of vaccine producer talking about the need to vaccinate with a third dose.
Three weeks ago we didn't even know the omicron mutation existed. Now the politicians know that we need a third dose to protect us? Really wish some scientific data on this. Though this variant is so recent, I doubt there are any data. We don't even know if it causes more severe disease than delta yet.
They were talking about and doing the research on if the booster was necessary for delta. They've operated on the data from delta and people were getting boosters before omicron was labeled that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
