Just the Facts, the Crown virus.

[kantuckid]

Ian, everyone is going to catch Covid, nothing anyone can do to prevent that.  

Everyone is going to be exposed to Covid at some point. The vaccine isn't 100% effective, but it improves your odds of not being infected. Better vaccines are in the pipeline targeted more at the Delta variant.
Better treatments are also being released that seem to work pretty well at keeping victims out of hospital (and presumably with less long term effects).
So there is certainly a plus side to delaying infections. It might be inevitable, but if it's After a vaccine booster and I can get a pack of Molin-whatsamacallit, then odds are better.

For curiosity's sake I just googled "how effective is smallpox vaccine" and was told 95%-same as my covid shot. Typhoid says 80% but dtap says higher?, yellow fever 99%, dtap~ 80-90%. I suppose it's about who gets (exposed as stated above) what as too a vaccines effectiveness? Above my pay grade... 
My county has 46% vaccination rate. 
In the cities, where shot rates are far higher, are people smarter? :D 

[SwampDonkey]

Those numbers don't represent every person as many will never be tested, and false positives/negatives/asymptomatic cases skew the statistics.

Yes, we don't test enough to begin with over here compared to the UK. But here in New Brunswick, if a rapid test is positive, it goes for further testing to confirm with a molecular test.



As far as testing here in NB before travel out of the country for a 1 to 3 day trip, within the 72hr window they allow for the test? Doesn't work for us, because the results of a molecular test can/will be after the 72 hrs, 4 days, so pretty much a useless endeavour. Can't get tested in the US near the border coming back to Canada, can only get it in Bangor, Maine a 2 hr drive away from the crossing. Only ones going over is snow birds I suspect, by spring that stupid rule will be dropped. Don't need no test to go to USA, just vaccination proof. On this side, for the molecular test, probably 2 hrs away as well. Local test is only rapid test, the Feds say is no good for travel requirement.

[SwampDonkey]

In the cities, where shot rates are far higher, are people smarter? :D

Well, in a way, since more people around and people are looking for more protection, whether real or not. But I don't see that percentage break down here because there are more rural folk than city folk here, and cities are small compared to down your way. We've got about 87% fully vaccinated and 93% with at least one jab. So as I said no split on whose getting the shots really.

[doc henderson]

some diseases do not mutate much, and you only get it once.  like chicken pox, although you can get shingles as your immunity decreases later in life.  this is a different disease (manifestation) of the same virus.  Now measles requires a second shot as outbreaks happened in college dorms, and military barracks.  Small pox has been all but irradiated, and well controlled in the US.  We have dealt with coronaviruses for years.  no vaccine as they usually cause the common cold.  Now with covid that has a predilection for the lungs, we have rapidly developed a vaccine.  when penicillin was first developed, it was thought to be the cure for all disease.  It was given to kids for colds and such.  It developed resistance over time as the more resistant bugs were selected over time.  also the drug was made with horse serum in the 50s and major anaphylaxes occurred.  A majority of people swear they are allergic to PCN, since it has been passed down from grandma, to mom to children, that "if you ever got a rash with PCN, if you take it again, you will prob. die"!  so after 70 years, people still believe the misinformation about PCN.  It was from the protein in horse serum, as part of manufacturing.  I have called the mothers of 20 something year-olds to ask what the reaction was.  The kids all say, "I am allergic and almost died".  The mom says, one of the kids got a rash, and i do not remember who, so I just tell them all they are allergic.  so there goes 80% of all oral antibiotics, that are the best first line, and cheap.  In 10 years we will know so much more!   8)  

[Don P]

Ian, everyone is going to catch Covid, nothing anyone can do to prevent that.  

Everyone is going to be exposed to Covid at some point. The vaccine isn't 100% effective, but it improves your odds of not being infected. Better vaccines are in the pipeline targeted more at the Delta variant.
Better treatments are also being released that seem to work pretty well at keeping victims out of hospital (and presumably with less long term effects).
So there is certainly a plus side to delaying infections. It might be inevitable, but if it's After a vaccine booster and I can get a pack of Molin-whatsamacallit, then odds are better.

For curiosity's sake I just googled "how effective is smallpox vaccine" and was told 95%-same as my covid shot. Typhoid says 80% but dtap says higher?, yellow fever 99%, dtap~ 80-90%. I suppose it's about who gets (exposed as stated above) what as too a vaccines effectiveness? Above my pay grade...
My county has 46% vaccination rate.
In the cities, where shot rates are far higher, are people smarter? :D

So effectiveness of this vaccine is about as good as those ones, the newer boosters and drugs will hone in on that. I heard the other day that there are over 450 covid drugs in trials. That raised a question what was the serious adverse side effect rate of those other vaccines compared to now?

[Ianab]

That raised a question what was the serious adverse side effect rate of those other vaccines compared to now?

I know that an Australian one was dropped in early testing because it also produced a HIV antibody, so after taking it a patient would test "positive" for HIV. They didn't have any disease, just some antibodies linked with it. Heck they might even have some resistance to HIV now? But that was considered an unacceptable side effect as you can imagine. even if the vaccine was effective. Others might just be less (or no more) effective than the existing vaccines, so why spend a billion $$ more on testing and approval. I'd wager that many were as good as Pfizer / J&J, Moderna, but those are already in use. There is only a market for a 4th option is it's going to work significantly better. 


To get to market a new drug has to basically be better (safer AND more effective) than what's already available. I guess cheaper might count too, but it still has to be safe and effective. Work is still being done on new vaccines, but they haven't got far enough though testing to know if they are "better".

[doctorb]

OK, all.  I am going to put on my administrator hat and ask that the "extended" discussions beyond "Just the Facts" be rerouted back to the Restricted section.  There is a thread or two there that are centered on the political nature of the Covid problem, and the differing opinions regarding freedoms, mandates, booster shots and all the rest.  For some reason, those discussions have ceased over there, and continued here within the Facts thread.

Why would I make this request?  Because many people read this thread for further information about the disease.  The "Facts" thread is able to be viewed by anyone with a computer (members and guests), unlike the Restricted Area, which requires FF membership and a specific request to enter the Restricted topics. Not all members view, or want to view, the Restricted section with its sharper edges and opinions.  But, looking at the recent change in the tenor of this thread, this may turn off members and guests who have felt that the Facts thread was a good source of medical info, which was, to a greater degree, devoid of politics. I believe that the Facts thread was, in part, created with that title because this powder keg of an issue carries a large number of opinionated arguments.

I am sure if I reviewed all my posts I would see that I am guilty of crossing over from the Restricted Area opinion thread to this one.  When I give an opinion on this thread I try to always so state. I'm not blaming or calling out anyone.  I just think that the purpose and positive nature of this thread is being co-opted, and I have had multiple requests to try and draw a line between these two threads.

So, please consider continuing political discussions regarding Covid on the Restricted thread.  Thank you.

[Don P]

I completely agree. 

There wasn't any intended political tenor there, just a question.
After roughly a year, are these vaccines proving to be any more dangerous than the vaccines that were used against smallpox, polio, etc?

[Ianab]

After roughly a year, are these vaccines proving to be any more dangerous than the vaccines that were used against smallpox, polio, etc?

I don't believe so. Pretty much any vaccine carries some small risk of side effects, up to and including death. The risk of serious side effects isn't zero, it's just very very small. 

Here in NZ there has been one death reported as related to the vaccine, due to myocarditis AND other underlying illnesses. The type of patient that Covid was likely to kill as well, if they caught it. That's from over 6 million doses. So not zero risk, but maybe a million times safer than catching the virus? Minor side effects, maybe needing a day or 2 off work do seem common though. It does seem to have more "kick" than the flu jabs, but those are more like a booster, for a virus your body has seen before. While the Covid shots are for a completely new virus. I now understand why kids were "tired and grumpy" after getting their MMR shots as youngsters. That's how I felt too. ;)

I was also reading a large study done in the US over several large health care companies. They were tracking large groups of patients that had got the vaccine, or not, and simply counting how many died of causes other than Covid in a given month. This was to check if the vaccine was causing some unknown increase in heart attacks / strokes etc. So sample groups of several million, and naturally hundreds of them actually died for various reasons. Results were that slightly LESS vaccinated people died. But there was certainly not any excess deaths in the vaccine group, and that was consistent over ages, sex and race.  This wasn't studying any individual cases, just anonymous data of overall trends pulled from the companies medical records database.

So they didn't explore reasons for ~5% less vaccinated people dying, but possibly they were people that took their Dr's other advice, and also took their BP and blood thinner meds as well? That's just speculation on my part, not a "fact". Maybe people that got the vaccine were less likely to drink drive? Dunno, that's a whole different study. 

But it basically put to rest the CT that thousands of people are mysteriously dying FROM the vaccine. Thousands of people have died AFTER getting the vaccine, but that's 100% expected. If you jab 100 million people, and 20,000 of them die in the next month, that's what you actually expect. If no one died, that WOULD be unexpected and very suspicious. 

[Roxie]

You start with "I don't believe so," and that's not opinion? 

:D

[doc henderson]

could have stated, " not that we know of yet"!     only time will tell.  like the PCN analogy.

[doc henderson]

I think the big thing for me, is the "way out" stuff and of course that is defined in the eyes of the beholder.  Much of this is opinion in that not enough time has gone bye and studies been done due to the recent nature.  Back with the old vaccines some kids had neurologic impairment, and or new onset of seizures.  some parents blamed the shot.  a portion of revenue from each vaccine goes into a fund to pay for neurologically "injured" kids.  I use quotations because the incidence of new seizures or impairment, is the same as the general population in the unvaccinated, or not recently vaccinated population.  You could infer that there is a cause and effect, since the government pays money for the care of these individuals. it was in an effort to keep the vaccines going, even though it is not believed to be related.  My grandfather had polio and limped his whole life.  hard to find blue collar work in the 30s and 40s if you cannot walk across an uneven plowed field..  i guess it was better to be alive.  many died of polio.  I would not be here I guess. 

[Southside]

Maybe they took their meds, maybe they didn't, maybe they drink and drive more.  So much for "just the facts", and more like "just the facts I want to see"

[doc henderson]

that is my point.  what we think are facts now, may be disproven in a month or a year or 50 years.  But the people promoting vit. C as an example, have been promoting it for anything and everything for 30 years.  the entities that think all vaccines are bad and have devoted there lives to that "fact" and send all new mothers envelopes of "information" with a skull and crossbones on it, are not to be considered reliable when they say the same thing about all vaccines.  i have mentioned the free copies I got from a doctor friends dad, "the cure for all diseases, and the cure for all cancers"  It is a bunch of natural hooey.  I know of deaths from folks that bought into this and died or nearly died.  i saw someone paralyzed from using a plaster to treat an infection on his back for two years, instead of "bad" antibiotics. the infection eroded the spine and destroyed the bone, and nearby cord.  The DO that prescribed the concoction of natural stuff at the patients wife's request, had no idea it was that bad.  We assume natural stuff cannot hurt you, but if it replaces other good treatment...  yes that limits us to traditional medicine.  we have to be open minded, but not repeat and promote information that could cause someone else to make a bad choice and avoid the "for now somewhat" proven treatment.  snake oil sales go up when people are fearful.  here we are.

[SwampDonkey]

Study on Vitamin D3 levels in the blood before COVID infection, reduces deaths. And it is a fact that we are very deficient of Vitamin D3. I have heard this from many doctors of health science. We can take a heck of a lot more IU's per day through supplementation than we do. Most people don't take any at all. I've heard/read a min of 4000 IU up to 10,000 IU is safe from many sources. Not a word mentioned about it by those in charge of health care.

High Vit D, low deaths - YouTube

[doc henderson]

many elderly folks are given monthly shots of B 12 and if you check levels they are off the charts high, not deficient.  they all say the shots make them feel better.  if you use supra physiologic levels, it is now a drug, not a vitamin used as various chemical reactions as a co-factor.  so are they using it to treat deficiency or using it as a drug.  you can take as much of a water soluble vitamin as you like, as it goes out in the urine.  fat soluble ones can cause toxicity.

[doc henderson]

I am trying to watch the video but computer is not going fast enough.

[doc henderson]

https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/supplements/vitamin-d/

[doctorb]

I had a low vitamin D level (19) a couple of years ago.  I took supplements, and on recheck a year later was > 50.  Orthpaedists check this value in osteopenic patients in hopes of slowing the loss of bone mass that occurs with age, and is worse in women after menopause.  Watched the video, and have seen this correlation elsewhere.  I agree with his conclusion (stated early in the video) that it's not a low Vit D level that leads to higher mortality with Covid, but that a low Vit D level correlates with people who are inherently sicker, and thus more susceptible to severe Covid.  Await further research and reporting.

[Ianab]

Maybe they took their meds, maybe they didn't, maybe they drink and drive more.  So much for "just the facts", and more like "just the facts I want to see"

This only relates to the arguments you will have seen online like "But what about all the people that are dying from the vaccine?"  That's actually a quite reasonable question to ask, because if there is some serious unknown side effect of the vaccine, that would be a very bad thing. We can all agree on that. 
So someone should check into this. 
CDC has, they pull the numbers from the medical companies  (Integrated Health Care Organizations) that have all the records of who was vaccinated (or not) and who has died. Those are basic "facts" in their computer system and they can pull up reports on things like that. They don't need to know why they died, except they are excluding Covid related deaths from the study. the just the basic numbers. 
Here are those numbers - https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7043e2.htm
And here is an explanation of what they mean. 
Coronavirus Vaccines vs. NON COVID-19 related deaths (New Data) - YouTube
You can go and double check their maths and analysis if you want. 
Now if someone believe the CDC is being run by the Lizard People and the numbers are all made up, then sorry I can't help. And if you have some real numbers that show something different is happening, lets look at them? But those numbers have lined up with what we are seeing locally, which is why I tend to believe them. 

[SwampDonkey]

I am trying to watch the video but computer is not going fast enough.

He's going to go into it more here in this video. Notice beside his masked mascot on the window ledge, a Vitamin D prop. Been there for some time in his videos. ;)

Vit D, part 2 - YouTube

[SwampDonkey]

Dr. Michael F. Holick on Vitamin D. He is an authority on the subject, lectures world wide. This video is in Vienna. Not about COVID, just the vitamin.

„Vitamin D â€" State of the art“ - Dr. Michael F. Holick in Vienna (English) - YouTube

[doctorb]

In Part II of the Vitamin D video, he wants to solidify the idea that people with low Vitamin D levels are more susceptible to severe Covid disease (and probably most infections).  Further study is needed to demonstrate that.  But the follow-up investigation that needs to take place is even more important, as there has been no demonstrated correlation demonstrating cause and effect between vitamin D level and Covid severity.  The study he analysed is an observational study, and merely reflects what the data showed.  It is not an interventional study, which would ask, "If people with low Vitamin D have poorer outcomes from Covid, does raising your Vit D level through increased intake correct the jeopardy of more severe disease that the low Vit D level predicts?"  We truly do not yet have any direct evidence that correcting low levels of Vit D can ward off severe Covid.  So....as he stated in the first video on Vitamin D, if people with multiple comorbidities are much more likely to have low Vitamin D levels, is it the comorbidities that lead to the increased likelihood of severe disease, or is it the low Vitamin D level.  Is it both?  Will correcting the Vit D level correct the comorbidities?  Unlikely.  Will correcting the Vit D level help ward off severe infection?  Possibly.  We still have much to learn.

Correction of low Vitamin D levels has been done with daily or weekly oral supplements.  My low Vit D level was treated with three months of 50,000IU of Vit D3 once a week for three months. 

[SwampDonkey]

Dr Holick's shows many studies concerning cells, genes and Vitamin D correlations mechanisms and pathways for better immune response, reducing heart disease and reducing diabetes, less tooth decay in infants.

It's interesting, that when you made Vit. D in your skin from sun it last 2-3x longer than supplementation.

Mother has noticed an improvement in reducing pain from arthritis since she increased Vit D supplementation, doesn't need pain killers any more for 'arthur'.  Vit D does not reverse what is already there, but makes it more manageable. And Dr Holick found this in clinical trials to be the case in seniors. Also found less bone fractures because you're more steady on your feet when: 1)your not suffering from chronic pain, 2)better muscle strength, 3) better extremity function.

Correction of low Vitamin D levels has been done with daily or weekly oral supplements.  My low Vit D level was treated with three months of 50,000IU of Vit D3 once a week for three months.

Have a look at about 35 minutes into Holick's video. Basically, not a long term remedy, good for a few months.

As to benefits to immunity and reduction of infection

43 mins into Holick's video, they now know the mechanisms.

Benefits to diabetes, MS, cancer, heart disease and arthritis incidence shown there after in video. Lots of evidence.

Concerning some studies being done that contradict his findings, he'll point out that there were a lot of misinterpretations of the data in their conclusions, they contradict the data when you dig into the study. Not only that, some studies not being conducted very well. Like selecting only patients that have fallen in the last 12 months to see if falling incidence is lower with supplementation. And studies where patients have already been undergoing treatment for deficiency to begin with. How bogus can you get? :D

[doctorb]

SwampDonkey-

I don't disagree with your interpretation of the video.  It's what's not said, and can't be said yet, that is the missing link to Vit D level and it's relationship to Covid.  We have all this basic and medical science about Vit D and disease, as your post and the video points out, but we don't know that patients who have had a chronically decreased levels of Vit D, who then have their Vit D levels raised to optimal levels, will react more favorably to catching Covid.  In other words, is Vitamin D more of a marker of susceptibility in a specific patient, or does correcting the level of Vit D assure a smoother course of this disease.  We have not demonstrated cause and effect.  We have not taken a population of people with low Vit D levels, corrected that with supplements, remeasured their levels, and demonstrated that the correction of the Vit D deficiency leads to different Covid outcomes.