Excargodog

I would argue that they helped to CREATE the politically induced readiness crisis by their misplaced "urgency" (can both urgency and institutional inertia really exist side by side?)

Maybe we ought to call it what it is Rick. We both saw it. Careerist political flag officers at the highest levels, forgetting their integrity in the battle to win their next star. You shouldn't wait to have Congress have to force you to do the right thing. Congress moves with glacial slowness, even when they actually understand what the right thing is.

This cockup has done lasting damage to the Public Health community but it has also (among other cockups, admittedly) done lasting damage to the military as well.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/509189/...o-decades.aspx

Excargodog

"Beneficial" is not a function of any immunization, it is a function of the ameliorization of risk. What is the risk of rabies in the US? Except for those on certain industries (dog-catchers, vets, etc.) it's trivial. In the US, we lose one or two people per year due to rabies. Overseas the risk is greater but in this country routine rabies immunization is unwarranted.

https://www.cdc.gov/rabies/location/...hs%20worldwide.

Smallpox in the final stages was eradicated by isolation and ring vaccination, NOT by universal vaccination. At no time in history was more than 80% of the world's population immunized against smallpox.

https://www.who.int/news-room/spotli...%20of%20people.

and there are plenty of immunizations that are GREAT vaccinations - like yellow fever - that are not universally recommended to US citizens because we don't (yet) have the vectors that spread those diseases.

And while you might argue that during the pandemic "everyone was at risk" the LEVELS of risk were certainly stratified by age. A healthy 20 year old was at pretty much trivial risk. In Italy and Spain in the early part of the epidemic 50% of the deaths were in those 85 years old and older - a group that comprises only 6.6% of the US population. The relative risk compared to the average of the rest of the population (not 85 or older) was fifteen times but relative to otherwise healthy 20 year olds it was far higher.

As I've repeatedly said, I'm not antivax. For those with sufficient risk they are a great benefit, but you target their use. Shingrix is great for decreasing the likelihood of those 50 and over to get shingles, but you don't give it to kids. Japanese B encephalitis is a moderately good vaccine, but you don't routinely use it in areas where Japanese B Encephalitis isn't common.

JohnBurke

I was treated a year ago for domestic dog bite and a subseuqent significant infection; one of the more painful I've ever had. I'm not a dog catcher. I do spend considerable time outside the US.

Rabies has been reduced to a small sample of infections domestically; not due to human inmmunization, but largely due to large-scale animal vaccination. Never the less, while twenty-five cases of rabies have been reported domestically to the CDC in the ten year period ending in 2018, up to 60,000 people domestically require post-exposure innoculation prophalaxic treatment. Those who have died typically refused or did not obtain prophalaxis following exposure.

Rabis is a poor example of vaccination efficacy: it's an effective vaccination and a very effective biologic prophalaxis post-exposure, as is the animal innoculation, but one must have a direct contact with an infected subject, and does not compare on scale, mode of transmission, rate of transmission, or rate of spread, to Covid.

Routine rabies vaccination is warranted for those at risk of exposure, like all vaccinations. In the case of the corona virus, anyone who gathered publically or had contact with other people in a public setting had risk of exposure, as did those in private settings when introduced to the vaccine. it had a high rate of spread and infection. It was largely controlled due to widespread vaccination, isolation, and precautions/behavior. The deniers benefitted from those who were proactive.

https://www.cdc.gov/rabies/location/...an_rabies.html[/size]

Ring vaccination and isolation were techniques that augmented and enhanced the rapidity of the effectiveness of the vaccination process; they were tactics, but did not replace vaccination. They utilzied it. The simple fact is that it was vaccination that was responsible for the "eradication" of smallpox." It was extremely beneficial to those at risk of exposure, which subsequent to eradication, was everyone. Even those not under direct exposure were directly benefitted by vaccination of others: the ultimate benefit was eradication. That was not possible without grand scale vacciantion, and those today who are unvaccinated are beneficiaries due to eradication. Unfortunately, very few today have immunity, given the lack of vaccination since eradication, and lack of boosters.

I'm vaccinated agaisnt smallpox.[/size]

I'm vaccinated against yellow fever. Twice. Unfortunately, the vaccination is no longer available in the US, though a French substitute is. Yellow fever vaccination is still required internationally in many locations, as is evidence of vaccination.

So far as existant vectors; these take little to alter. We had none such for the Corona virus, until we did, and while prior SARS (et al) outbreaks occurred offshore, Covid quickly made it to the US and spread rapidly. More rapid development and availability of vaccination would have been highly beneficial. Transmission rates, severity, and mortality began to drop subsequent to widespread use of vaccination.

My kids all got it, some with long term complications, all young, all in the low-exposure group. Eveyrone was at risk of infection. Subsequent degrees of complications varied by demographic, but the risk of transmission existed across the board, globally. Death was hardly the only metric, and the economic cost was substantial for medical treatment alone, covid restrictions not withstanding.

I'm vaccinated with Shingrix, twice, and for Japanese encephalitis; I do frequent locations with exposure to Japanese encephalitis. I also carry virtually every other vaccination available. I'd prefer not to test their efficacy, but they're certainly worthwhile vaccinations and with exposure, I anticipate a degree of protection relative to the recency of the vaccination and any associated boosters or re-vaccinations. I do the quadvalent annual flu vaccine, too. Doesn't mean I won't get it. Good insurance, and there are no guarantees.

While Shingrix is given to those over 50, generally speaking (shingles occurs among those under 50, too, including children), it also has a 50-90% effectiveness. About half of the population will experience shingles at least once in their life. It's unpleasant. Painful. The vaccination is well worth the effort, and few who have had shingles would argue that point. Shingles is not a valid comparison with Covid however, any more than smallpox or rabies, nor is Japanese Encephalitis. Shingles occurs in many who have had chickenpox, and can also lead to chickenpox, and anyone who has had chickenpox is at risk, regardless of exposure to others subsequent to experiencing chickenpox. Varicella vaccine against chickenpox is given nearly universally these days. Go figure.

Thedude86

John,

Im not trying to be negative. I'm just telling you why we're having a hard time seeing your argument. Your basic premise is that the covid vaccines were as effective as any other vaccine that has ever existed and then you give all these data and history lessons based on that. The former is just simply not true and why we can't follow you. The covid vax might have been beneficial for people over 75 for about 2-3 months, then it tapers off, then its actually negative. There is no data that exists that shows the covid vax is beneficial after a year. There are numerous if not hundreds of studies that support both sides of the covid debate. For some reason, every single study that supports it, is either funded mostly by Pfizer specifically, or some other major pharmaceutical. In addidtion to that, a 6th grader can read these studies and pick out the severe limitations listed even if they disregard the funding issue. Any other vaccine thats ever been given, regardless of type of disease or illness, does not have this problem. There are plenty of non funded and non bias studies that support just about every other vaccine. This is even regardless of the side effects. Which imo, even if you think the side effects are extremely rare, Dr. Fauci would even agree that the side effects are much more common for the covid vax than any other vaccine. But again, side effects aside, the covid vax is just not in the same universe as any other vaccine.

Excargodog

At the risk of being overly didactic, the various COVID vaccines are very similar to the veterinary coronavirus vaccines, in that they provide PARTIAL and SHORT-LIVED protection from infection and spread as well as ameliorating the severity of the disease in immunized animals that nonetheless get the disease. They were a Godsend to those at high risk from the disease (elderly and those with immune problems) but pretty much worthless for general use for those 15 and under who in some countries the immunization still hasn't been cleared for.

What they NEVER had a chance to do was to stop the epidemic. It ain't just "the right wing looney antivaxxers" either. First of all, 20% of the world's population STILL hasn't been vaccinated mostly for logistic and economic reasons and many of those who were vaccinated got the Sinovax which only had about 50% efficacy. But the logistics of mass - in fact worldwide - vaccination programs are sufficiently daunting that anyone familiar with such programs knew from the get-go that immunizing this organism out of existence was simply not going to happen. We've had polio vaccines which are far more efficacious and long lasting and much less of a logistical challenge than any coronavirus vaccine since the mid-195os and we haven't yet managed to exterminate polio.

Thedude86

I partially agree.

The only time the vaccines minimized the severity of the disease was during the original and delta strains. And again, only for 2-3 months then eventually it was a negative effect. So the only way you would actually benefit from the vaccines is you would have to be exposed within the first 3 months of the original vaccine... and then never be exposed again. Otherwise, its a wash. i agree with a lot of what youre saying but I think you may be looking at the same data that John is looking at. The only data supports less severity or less death is extremely contamined with errors such as misclassfication as I eluded to earlier. (Vaccinated counted as unvaccinated or vice versa). Or someone coming in for a broken leg or car accident, testing positive for covid, and then counting that as covid hospitalization or death even though covid had zero to do with it. There is data that exists that excludes these errors, but they don't support the narrative. Ironically, they also happen to be the only studies not funded by any large pharmaceutical.

Thedude86

I don't know anyone who died from covid vaccinated or not.

Not discounting your experience, but there are a lot of covid deaths that are actually flu or pneumonia that even the family thinks was actually Covid. Not a lot like a few hundred, but thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. This was admitted by the CDC and still to this day you can look on the CDC website and see that flu and pneumonia deaths have been almost non existent since 2020. Again, not discounting your personal experiences but ill give my own personal experience as an example. It's anecdotal, but it just shows how screwed up our system is. We will probably never know the true number unless we can get some competent people to start running things. But then again, competence doesn't help profits.

My grandfather died in December 2020. Only 6 of us were allowed to go to the funeral and only because the ceremony was outside at the gravesite. It was in Chicago which was Covid crazy for much longer than the rest of the country, but thats a different argument for a different day. He was 96. He was in pretty bad shape for close to 10 years and I'm actually surprised he lasted as long as he did. He tested positive for Covid a month before his death. He was already in bad shape and Covid did not change his condition. He tested negative a week later. Few weeks later he died. He was counted as a Covid death despite testing negative several times before he died. And obviously, he would be considered an unvaccinated death since he died before the vaccines were available. And again, im surprised he lasted as long as he did. Let's say the vaccines worked perfectly 100% and my grandfather was able to get the shot. There's no way it would have changed his outcome as he was ready to go at anytime. In most states the average age of covid death was older than the average age of death in general.

Second story. Flew with a guy with a similar story. His father in law died. I don't remember exactly when this was but I would guess sometime in 2021. He said his father in law tested positive 6 months before he died. Tested negative shortly after and would continue to get tested once a week until his death as I believe this was common practice in the nursing homes during this time frame. Just like my grandfather. His father in law was still counted as a covid death. Seems a little extreme, but he said the family actually got a lawyer involved to change the cause on the death certificate and it took several months but they eventually changed it. I'm sure his "tally" under covid death was never removed though.

Doesn't disprove or change your experience. I just say all this to show that the numbers for or against vaccines are most likely wildly inaccurate.

rickair7777

That's true, eventually in hindsight they should be able to refine the numbers. Assuming you can someone without an agenda.

The folks I know who died were almost certainly covid, coincided with local outbreaks, tested positive, and then developed the specific symptoms. I was close enough to the families to get the details.

Again my personal experience does not constitute statistics.

rickair7777

IMO the great utility of the vaccines was getting half the world out from under it's bed and back to life before permanent economic and societal damage was caused by isolation and lockdowns.

The fact that the vaccines impart relatively long-term, and significantly potent protection against severe disease is a bonus for those who need it.

Excargodog

Absolutely - as does having once had the illness if you did survive it. In the countries not allowing vaccination of those under 15 (unless at special risk) those unvaccinated kids now have the same resistance to severe disease as those in countries that permitted/encouraged/required such vaccination. Ultimately it was that COVID-19 was a NOVEL coronavirus that caused it's relatively high mortality. Once it became no longer novel to those individuals getting it, it became more akin to the pathogenicity of RSV or influenza. Not trivial to the public health, but not highly lethal either.