#103

It’s time to quote Rodney King … “Can we all get along?”

I think all of us have much more in common than this challenging topic. It is interesting how this topic has created more emotion and differing positions, from reasonable, highly educated people.

It ruined years of my enjoyment in life, cost me a lot of $$, and killed a lot of people. I firmly felt that everyone should be compelled to be vaccinated at the beginning … I’ve since, in retrospect changed this position. It was scary to see what level of control occurred, and for little benefit and huge harm.

Hopefully we learn something from this before the next similar biologic agent comes along. Happily, with all of us optimizing our T cell immunity, and taking our Rapamycin faithfully - we’ll get to continue on this forum as the viruses are unlikely to take us down.

5 Likes
#104

image
image1920×1408 179 KB

5 Likes
#105

So the difference is you’ve taken a modified flu vaccine every year for decades, that’s why you continue to do so, and you haven’t taken the covid vaccine for so long.

Do you do the same for other medications, where you avoid those you’ve not already taken for long?

Just trying to find the symmetry breaker or logical inconsistency.

#106

Actually, we have a ton of published data showing better outcomes for vaccinated vs unvaccinated patients. Vaccines reduce the odds of severe illness/death and also have risks, just like any other medication, and a non-politically-biased, objective risk/benefit analysis is warranted for each individual based on age, previous infection, risk factors, etc.

I don’t think anyone is still pushing for vaccine mandates, are they? I think they were warranted in the early days, but definitely not now. And I agree that vaccines are likely less useful now, but still better than nothing and with only very small risks.

1 Like
#108

I absolutely love the approach here. It’s almost like you’ve merged into my wife challenging everything, poking holes, and being amazingly difficult while doing so. I continue to be impressed by your responses! The nice thing is, even when I don’t agree with you, there is almost always a very sensible scientific basis behind what you put forward. It’s remarkable entertainment watching this if folks can just have a little less skin in the game.

6 Likes
#109

It’s intriguing that we feel essentially identical on this. Probably the shared experience and knowledge.
I generally feel that the government response to Covid did as much harm as the virus. Significant damage done to children, freedom, trust, opinions toward vaccines in general.
What’s most worrying to me is that many people have no concept of the damage done.

3 Likes
#110

It would be helpful to be able to analyze the Covid boosters situation without a reference to the authoritarian Covid lockdowns and vaccine mandates that cloud our judgment.

Do we have RCTs on the updated Covid vaccines? Are they ongoing RCTs?

3 Likes
#111

I agree - the damage to public perception of scientists and what we know and don’t know - just had all manner of damage. For those of us that work hard to be experts and know what we know - it undermined public perception of this expertise. However, the amount of disinformation out there on the web by people with credentials and social followings is already prominent, but the messaging was really not correct on this, nor were the actions. I however don’t think anything has been learned from this. It is a missed opportunity to plan to do better the next time something like this occurs.

@adssx I absolutely agree - the science needs to properly move forward such that we have knowledge, and the complaints on public actions and policies have not a bit of influence on whether covid boosters are beneficial and in what demographics. Age is a huge factor (?epigenetic or actual) and comorbidities especially obesity and metabolic disease, as is COPD. Just like how I look at Rx’ing Paxlovid - it is an assessment of likelihood of preventing a bad outcome. I make this decision on most ER shifts lately - and decide where the benefit is worth the expense and side effects. If I’d not Rx an antiviral, there is no need to test. If I’d give one and the patient will take it (many won’t) then I’ll test

2 Likes
#112

Ohhh, glad you mentioned paxlovid.

So, I had always planned to take pax if I ever knowingly got covid because I heard it most likely reduces the chance of long covid. Is this still the thinking? I haven’t heard much about it in a while.

My friends who felt extremely sick during covid did see a huge improvement when taking it.

I still have an old expired free box that probably still works. It’s way too expensive at this point.

#113

How “dangerous” can the covid vaccine be, if a guy can get literally hundreds of shots and not only be fine, but have robust immunity:

Obviously, one wonders about mental health, I can hardly imagine even the logistics of getting 217 shots, but unless he’s a physiological freak, it seems the covid vaccine is not exactly a killer.

1 Like
#114

There is very little support for taking Paxlovid. I only prescribe it for high risk patients and that’s only because it’s the only thing I have to offer. There were a couple studies recently in NEJM or JAMA that showed no benefit to taking Paxlovid.

3 Likes
#115

It’s an n of 1. What does that prove or disprove?

1 Like
#116

Comments on the metformin data? There’s not a whole lot of it, but what’s there seems quite compelling, especially this newer study showing pretty dramatic suppression of viral load:

2 Likes
#117

Interesting how one guy can take 217 shots and not die (yet), while others have died after only one shot. I wonder what it is about their bodies that determine this.

#118

Myocarditis is more common than I expected in non-vaccinated individuals. And there are a lot more “causes” than I expected.

Myocarditis and pericarditis risk with mRNA COVID-19 vaccination compared to vaccinated individuals: A retrospective cohort study in a Spanish Tertiary Hospital

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0753332224000623

Cardiovascular risks and COVID‑19: New research confirms the benefits of vaccination

Safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination and infection in 5.1 million children in England

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-47745-z#Sec10

1 Like
#119

On this topic, I don’t think it’s possible to convince someone with evidence. Unless people like @LukeMV would say what would be required to change their mind.

#120

Well since you called me out…

I love evidence when it comes to every topic discussed on this wonderful forum full of bright minds when it comes to Rapamycin, drugs, supplements, exercise, etc.

When it comes to Covid, then no. It’s the most corrupt thing that has ever happened in our lifetimes. I’ve also seen a lot of negative evidence from independent sources who were all censored by western governments (as Mark Zuckerberg even confirmed a few days ago)

Several people in this very thread got bad adverse reactions from it. I am guessing maybe only 5% of adverse vaccine reactions were even reported. Just filling out a report saying that is a daunting task.

I reject the claim that these vaccines saved lives. I think the opposite is true.

My heart goes out to the victims of the people who died or got seriously injured from being heavily pressured into getting the vaccine. I wish I could say I didn’t know any of them. My heart also goes out to people who died from covid, but I don’t believe the vaccine would have saved them.

1 Like
#121

That’s what I thought, if you’ve chosen to be closed-minded and not allow any evidence to change your mind on this topic, that’s your decision.

1 Like
#122

I could say the same of you. You were quick to dismiss a 16 page paper that used a sample size of over 800k Italians showing a significant loss in life expectancy (37%) from the vaccine, stating that the source was not trustworthy. Maybe you would have trusted it if the results were ones you had hoped for instead.

#123

I don’t believe anything published in MDPI is worthwhile to read. So I wouldn’t even know about it, if it was favorable to what I believe is true.