NBA protocols/Covid/Vaccine - Discussion thread

[michaelm]

The problem with the Pfizer vaccine in Israel was not in the first 3 months. And if you never get infected with the coronavirus there is perhaps some difficulty with transmitting same.

This is about transmission, not efficacy, the antibodies in the respiratory tract wane after 3 month and the person become more susceptible to transmitting, while being well protected from severe illness.

Reference thank you. 5 or 6 months is what I have read in regard to the need for a booster dose, and addressed by such a booster jab which has no greater morbidity as I have previously posted. I am entirely happy to have and am planning to have such a booster dose to protect my patients, and if you can give me evidence for the need to do so earlier I am also happy to have an earlier jab.

Maybe they will eventually need to come up with a better vaccine if more than one booster dose is needed, but that is far from established with the Pfizer vaccine at this point in time, and one view in scientific circles is that the optimum time for the first and second doses was not established for the existing vaccines given the perceived urgency of the situation. They are btw actually already trialling a vaccine in the UK against a less mutable component of coronaviruses than the spike protein. What risk do any of the vaccines carry over and above getting infected with the virus also btw, which with the delta variant will likely eventually occur with everyone with your approach, it seems likely with better outcomes for the vaccinated rather than the unvaccinated as you have actually posted yourself.

[Mavrelous]

If you ever looked at the modeling on exponential spread you’d know what a lifesaver that 37% is for hundreds of thousands of people.

Give me a **** break with exponential spread, exponential spread stays exponential with 37% reduction, and if some fears his life then he should get vaccinated, and we've seen these doom and gloom predictions since the get go, this virus comes and goes in waves and there is very little you can do to stop it, even lockdown.
This is about telling Kyrie, Beal, Wiggins and Trey Burke (I won't even mention Isaac since he's recovered and better protected than most players), you need to give up your bodily autonomy because you are 37% more likely to spread the virus than your peers (which again, is only relevant 3 months post vaccination, after that it drastically drops), or you need to go through rigorous testing and we'll limit your movement, even though your peers can get infected and pass it over at 63% chance you can, but we won't bother limiting them at all.
The policy makes ZERO sense, just like the mandate.

[MoneyTalks41890]

If you ever looked at the modeling on exponential spread you’d know what a lifesaver that 37% is for hundreds of thousands of people.

Give me a **** break with exponential spread, exponential spread stays exponential with 37% reduction, and if some fears his life then he should get vaccinated, and we've seen these doom and gloom predictions since the get go, this virus comes and goes in waves and there is very little you can do to stop it, even lockdown.
This is about telling Kyrie, Beal, Wiggins and Trey Burke (I won't even mention Isaac since he's recovered and better protected than most players), you need to give up your bodily autonomy because you are 37% more likely to spread the virus than your peers (which again, is only relevant 3 months post vaccination, after that it drastically drops), or you need to go through rigorous testing and we'll limit your movement, even though your peers can get infected and pass it over at 63% chance you can, but we won't bother limiting them at all.
The policy makes ZERO sense, just like the mandate.

Ok, so you don’t understand exponents. But ya know 700k people are dead in the US alone so maybe figure out how all that works if you want to be this loud and this wrong.

[michaelm]

If you ever looked at the modeling on exponential spread you’d know what a lifesaver that 37% is for hundreds of thousands of people.

Give me a **** break with exponential spread, exponential spread stays exponential with 37% reduction, and if some fears his life then he should get vaccinated, and we've seen these doom and gloom predictions since the get go, this virus comes and goes in waves and there is very little you can do to stop it, even lockdown.
This is about telling Kyrie, Beal, Wiggins and Trey Burke (I won't even mention Isaac since he's recovered and better protected than most players), you need to give up your bodily autonomy because you are 37% more likely to spread the virus than your peers (which again, is only relevant 3 months post vaccination, after that it drastically drops), or you need to go through rigorous testing and we'll limit your movement, even though your peers can get infected and pass it over at 63% chance you can, but we won't bother limiting them at all.
The policy makes ZERO sense, just like the mandate.

Reference for the need for a booster dose at 3 months thanks as I already asked you. Protection against infection is oddly protection against transmission as I said, which is why I had the Pfizer as i also said. If having been vaccinated you get the infection you get very good immunity according to the very paper people are quoting in regard to natural immunity, except with much less mortality and morbidity than with contracting the virus unprotected by vaccination.

[Mavrelous]

Ok, so you don’t understand exponents. But ya know 700k people are dead in the US alone so maybe figure out how all that works if you want to be this loud and this wrong.

Jesus Christ there is no getting into you people, you're cheering for a freaking survailance nightmare accompanied with medical dictatorship because of things that sound scary with no actual backing.

[michaelm]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Vaccines reduce transmission, greatly reduce the risk of hospitalization, and pretty much eliminate the chance of dying, with no widespread significant or really even minor adverse effects. Those are facts.

37%, that's the reduction, you want to roll out vaccine passports, fire people from their jobs (even recovered!!!!), for a vaccine that reduces transmission by 37%, in the 1st 3 months and then fades.
I don't think people understand what they are suggesting to do for the society as a whole with these measure and what they are getting from vaccine.

If you ever looked at the modeling on exponential spread you’d know what a lifesaver that 37% is for hundreds of thousands of people.

That too of course. Anything that contributes to the R1 being less than 1.0.

[Mavrelous]

Reference for the need for a booster dose at 3 months thanks as I already asked you. Protection against infection is oddly protection against transmission as I said, which is why I had the Pfizer as i also said. If having been vaccinated you get the infection you get very good immunity according to the very paper people are quoting in regard to natural immunity, except with much less mortality and morbidity than with contracting the virus unprotected by vaccination.

When did I say you need booster every 3 months? And the protection of the virus is against severe illness, not infection.

[michaelm]

Ok, so you don’t understand exponents. But ya know 700k people are dead in the US alone so maybe figure out how all that works if you want to be this loud and this wrong.

Jesus Christ there is no getting into you people, you're cheering for a freaking survailance nightmare accompanied with medical dictatorship because of things that sound scary with no actual backing.

And you have started from an ideological position against which you will accept no evidence and for which you attempt to cherry pick data to support. Again, there is ample precedent for infection control measures including vaccination for many jobs, and for health workers in particular. Whether this should apply to NBA players is a different question as I have already conceded.

[Mavrelous]

And you have started from an ideological position against which you will except no evidence and for which you attempt to cherry pick data to support.

Yeah, liberty and privacy are ideological position and not basic rights in our day and age, you have that right.

[michaelm]

And you have started from an ideological position against which you will except no evidence and for which you attempt to cherry pick data to support.

Yeah, liberty and privacy are ideological position and not basic rights in our day and age, you have that right.

Not independent of the rights of others not to be infected with preventable communicable diseases as previously. Do you think typhoid Mary who was doubtless a lowly paid ordinary worker should have had the liberty to keep working as a cook ?.

Again I say I agree it is indeed arguable for NBA players in the current circumstance.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Yeah, liberty and privacy are ideological position and not basic rights in our day and age, you have that right.

Not independent of the rights of others not to be infected with preventable communicable diseases as previously. Do you think typhoid Mary who was doubtless a lowly paid ordinary worker should have had the liberty to keep working as a cook ?.

Again I say I agree it is indeed arguable for NBA players in the current circumstance.

People don’t actually understand what freedom and liberty actually mean. Freedom “to” do something is just as important as freedom “from” something like being assaulted or getting infected with a plague.

[HollowEarth]

Ok, so you don’t understand exponents. But ya know 700k people are dead in the US alone so maybe figure out how all that works if you want to be this loud and this wrong.

Jesus Christ there is no getting into you people, you're cheering for a freaking survailance nightmare accompanied with medical dictatorship because of things that sound scary with no actual backing.

No, they really did die; it's true. Do you need sources for people that died?

[Mavrelous]

Yeah, liberty and privacy are ideological position and not basic rights in our day and age, you have that right.

Not independent of the rights of others not to be infected with preventable communicable diseases as previously. Do you think typhoid Mary who was doubtless a lowly paid ordinary worker should have had the liberty to keep working as a cook ?.

Again I say I agree it is indeed arguable for NBA players in the current circumstance.

This is getting circular and quite frankly stupid.
You don't have the right for 0 risk in society, I already mentioned this at one of my 1st responses, there are measure that can and should be taken if proven to have a significant effect, but not every reduction of risk is an opening for tyranical measures.
A vaccinated person has 95-99% protection from severe COVID, these difference in risk the unvaccinated poses compared to the vaccinated is 37%*(1-5)%, is this different than the flu? and this reduction is only effective for the 1st 3 months.
Is this a justification for firing an unvaccinated person (and medical personel of all things)?
Is this a justification to practically isolate an unvaccinated NBA player and claim he can't play in his homecourt?

Is this a justification to breach an existing contract by forcing the player to take the risk of vaccination, however small that be?

You have lost all grasp of reality and the actual risks and probabilities being presented here.

[michaelm]

Reference for the need for a booster dose at 3 months thanks as I already asked you. Protection against infection is oddly protection against transmission as I said, which is why I had the Pfizer as i also said. If having been vaccinated you get the infection you get very good immunity according to the very paper people are quoting in regard to natural immunity, except with much less mortality and morbidity than with contracting the virus unprotected by vaccination.

When did I say you need booster every 3 months? And the protection of the virus is against severe illness, not infection.

No, the Pfizer vaccine at least initially prevents you from getting infected even with the delta variant with high efficacy and is better than the other vaccine available in Australia, the Astra Zeneca vaccine, at doing so, and when I got vaccinated the vaccination interval for completion of vaccination and reputed at the time full efficacy was 3 weeks rather than 3 months, which was important to me in my particular circumstance. The Astra Zeneca vaccine may offer equal or better long term protection against actual hospitalisation and illness than the Pfizer vaccine, and may not drop off as the Pfizer vaccine does in offering protection against actual infection despite being less effective against same initially, and perhaps gives better cell mediated immunity, antibodies not being the whole story although important in regard to actually contracting infection with the virus.

[Ckay]

Read on Twitter

[michaelm]

Yeah, liberty and privacy are ideological position and not basic rights in our day and age, you have that right.

Not independent of the rights of others not to be infected with preventable communicable diseases as previously. Do you think typhoid Mary who was doubtless a lowly paid ordinary worker should have had the liberty to keep working as a cook ?.

Again I say I agree it is indeed arguable for NBA players in the current circumstance.

This is getting circular and quite frankly stupid.
You don't have the right for 0 risk in society, I already mentioned this at one of my 1st responses, there are measure that can and should be taken if proven to have a significant effect, but not every reduction of risk is an opening for tyranical measures.
A vaccinated person has 95-99% protection from severe COVID, these difference in risk the unvaccinated poses compared to the vaccinated is 37%*(1-5)%, is this different than the flu? and this reduction is only effective for the 1st 3 months.
Is this a justification for firing an unvaccinated person (and medical personel of all things)?
Is this a justification to practically isolate an unvaccinated NBA player and claim he can't play in his homecourt?

Is this a justification to breach an existing contract by forcing the player to take the risk of vaccination, however small that be?

You have lost all grasp of reality and the actual risks and probabilities being presented here.

See my next post. The Pfizer vaccine gives a high degree of protection against being infected even with the delta variant of the virus and against transmitting the virus initially, which drops off after 5 to 6 months as the Israelis found with their health workers, but was restored by revaccinating them.

Sure the virus very likely waxes and wanes independent of vaccination and social distancing etc restrictions as well.

What you actually want epidemiologically though is an R1 less than 1.0, which means each person infected infects less than 1 other person, which prevents exponential spread. This was managed for a prolonged period where I live in Australia by restrictions far short of lockdown and diligent contact tracing without vaccines with the original virus. The delta variant is so infectious that pretty much anyone in a household who is unvaccinated will contract the virus, although there are some people who have a genetic variation which may be protective, which was far from the case with the first version of the virus. The event that spread the delta variant widely in Sydney Australia outside of the original occurrence in the Eastern part of Sydney (Bondi where the beach is actually) was a party in an outer suburb attended by an infected person where 50 odd unvaccinated attendees universally contracted the virus and 8 or so vaccinated health workers who were attendees did not.

And do you think it is vaguely possible that the patients health workers treat tend to be old and sick ?. In the USA with 30% or more unvaccinated and Australia with an even lower vaccination rate when I got myself vaccinated I consider there is a moral imperative to get vaccinated as a health worker regardless of mandates, and there are all manner of infection control mandates which are obligatory in any case. including Hep B vaccination in Australia.

[The High Cyde]

Lol these anti-vaxxers need to create their own commune, live isolated from all of us and create your own dumbass anti-science society for all I care. Let them go the way of the dodo, fly with that ignorance baby.
Done coddling these fools. 700000+ dead “bu..bu..but my body my choice!! Wahhhh” get a grip.

Someone has the audacity to share a different opinion as you and now you want segregation. Unfortunately for you that is not reality and we're living in 2021. Not 1951.

Keep laughing chief

[TheAlanParsons]

Draymond does realise polio has basically been wiped out because of vaccines, right?

These guys have no perspective on what every day people are exposed to with covid. They exist in a world where they basically have security and safety organised for them and they're not going to work every day in an office or a school or a supermarket, or walking along a crowded street, or having to exist pay cheque to pay cheque. The consequences for them not taking the vaccine are not the same as an everyday person.

Words carry weight from people like LeBron. It's probably not intention but his and Draymond's comments just validate those who are already hesitant and fuel those who are anti-vax. Frighteningly irresponsible for what is a genuine public health matter.

Jesus. This isn't the polio vaccine. Back when I was a kid they gave the polio vaccine in 2 stages. First an injection. This was akin to the covid vaccines. It was not steralizing but dampened effects. The second dose was oral and WAS steralizing. In rare cases though it could activate and cause the disease. To protect against this was the reason the first leaky dose was given. Just giving a leaky vaccine is dangerous. You aren't wiping out a damn thing.

So how was the Salk vaccine dangerous exactly ?. I had both the Salk and the Sabin oral vaccine as a kid as well. An oral attenuated live virus vaccine is the one that later led to milder forms of polio in third world populations . The Salk vaccine was a killed virus vaccine which never gave polio to anyone. I am not saying this medically but there was no polio in Australia by the time I got the Salk vaccine as a kid or after.

Yes those two are exactly what I was referring to. The reason just giving the first one alone is dangerous is that people who have gotten it still get infected. It sits and their bodies and has the opportunity to mutate. Also, since their symptoms are repressed they go around like nothing is wrong and spread it. Ironically this is what the unvaccinated accused of doing. Personally I feel the covid vaccines are perfectly appropriate for the at risk portion of the populace.

[Rapcity_11]

It's so high that it's not even a newsworthy item here anymore.

Are you proud of thousands of people dying not being newsworthy? Like wtf.

Deaths are down massively from even a few weeks ago. What is your angle?

That the number is still insanely high. Obviously.

[nikster]

Yeah, liberty and privacy are ideological position and not basic rights in our day and age, you have that right.

Not independent of the rights of others not to be infected with preventable communicable diseases as previously. Do you think typhoid Mary who was doubtless a lowly paid ordinary worker should have had the liberty to keep working as a cook ?.

Again I say I agree it is indeed arguable for NBA players in the current circumstance.

This is getting circular and quite frankly stupid.
You don't have the right for 0 risk in society, I already mentioned this at one of my 1st responses, there are measure that can and should be taken if proven to have a significant effect, but not every reduction of risk is an opening for tyranical measures.
A vaccinated person has 95-99% protection from severe COVID, these difference in risk the unvaccinated poses compared to the vaccinated is 37%*(1-5)%, is this different than the flu? and this reduction is only effective for the 1st 3 months.
Is this a justification for firing an unvaccinated person (and medical personel of all things)?
Is this a justification to practically isolate an unvaccinated NBA player and claim he can't play in his homecourt?

Is this a justification to breach an existing contract by forcing the player to take the risk of vaccination, however small that be?

You have lost all grasp of reality and the actual risks and probabilities being presented here.

The antivax always cling to percentages not realizing (or intentionally ignoring) how large of an impact that means on a populatoin level. A 37% reduction would mean 3000 less hospitalizations every day at the US current rate. In the last year thats over a million hospitalizations preventable just from reduction in transmission alone.