28 ms·

Stanford requires booster shots for all students

180 points by montefischer 5y ago

jeffalbertson 5y ago
Fascinating honesty in a lot of comments in this thread. HN trends liberal and the sentiment here feels growing frustration with how gov, corps, schools are handling things. I sense the general population is turning a corner, where despite what your politics are on the vaccine, everyone is over it and will demand life prior to covid.
- md_ 5y ago
  - DenisM 5y ago
    Please don’t do this. From the guidelines: Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - Der_Einzige 5y ago
      Sorry, this rule is another example of rules that should be removed from HN. This thread does indeed look astroturfed to all hell and the current role encourages users to ignore it. Dang and the rest of HN needs to seriously consider reforming this rule rather than sticking their fingers in their ears and going "lalalala" as this stuff happens.
      - mardifoufs 5y ago
        What makes you say this thread is astroturfed? This is a controversial subject that usually leads to more emotional debate, but there's absolutely nothing to indicate astroturfing. The word does not mean "opinions I don't agree with" and isn't even synonymous with brigading (which I don't see any proof of either)
    - throwaway40FA 5y ago
      If you turn on showdead and have a scroll through the second page here you might come to agree with the parent.
- throwaway40FA 5y ago
tomohawk 5y ago
Posted earlier. Related. One student's response. https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/life-is-too-short-to-be-miserable https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/life-is-too-shor...
- allturtles 5y ago
  This response is directed at the plan to delay in-person instruction (and the assumption that other campus restrictions will follow), not to the booster mandate that is the headline here.
drno123 5y ago
What happens with immune system if you get booster shots every 3 months for, let’s say, 3 years?
- throwawaymedia 5y ago
  Nobody knows.
  - falcolas 5y ago
    Only because we haven’t had 3 years to study. We have lots of data about the impact of the vaccine so far though, and its largely positive.
    - throwawaymedia 5y ago
      According to what we have today there is no need to vaccinate healthy young people.
      - drno123 5y ago
        According to what we know, if you have recovered from delta variant you have much stronger and longer-lasting immunity then if you get vaccinated against original Wuhan strain. Yet, EU Covid pass is valid for 12 months post vaccination and only 6 months post recovery.
- aeternum 5y ago
- pm90 5y ago
  Presumably not much. If you look at the amount of antibodies produced they’re a pretty insignificant amount (if that’s what the concern is).
  - kyruzic 5y ago
    How about we stop presuming things and do some actual science. This is supposedly one of the most prestigious universities in the world throwing out the foundations for modern thought in the name of fear and profits for the greediest companies in the entire world. Their slogan is literally "the wind of freedom blows". Has the wind stopped blowing?
marvin 5y ago
Does anyone have a summary of the current science regarding the third vaccine shot for covid? I had the impression that the safety effect for someone in good health under 45 was neglible, although with a significant decrease in risk of catching or passing on the virus. With these effects waning on a time-scale similar to the first two doses. Particularly curious regarding the risk-benefit ratio for a healthy young adult. How much of a no-brainer is an extra vaccine dose at this point? And do we know something yet about a decrease in the «no sense of smell» long-term complication?
- elzbardico 5y ago
  Science like in peer-reviewed long term Randomized Clinical Trials? I couldn't find much, it looks like it is basically navigating from the seat of the pants and let's measure it later.
  - SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
    Well that seems dangerous. Imagine the reaction if they get something wrong, the next time it won’t be just divisive, it’ll be war.
- bryan0 5y ago
  Boosters are beneficial even if you’re under 45: https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-12-09/large-studies-shows-huge-benefit-of-covid-19-booster-shots https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-12-09/large-studi... Edit: critical to beneficial
  - MaxHoppersGhost 5y ago
    Your article says they are beneficial, not critical.
    - bryan0 5y ago
      Thanks I updated my comment
  - 5y ago
mikestew 5y ago
I’m all for requiring booster shots for $ACTIVITY, but we need to collectively get our shit together on informing folks of how to get said booster. Or maybe it’s just Washington. I was looking for a booster, so I went to our handy state Department of Health website for the vaccine locator. Nearly every single listing said something to the effect of “last updated: three months ago”. IOW, the site is now abandoned and unmaintained because, hey, we rolled out those vaccines and PROBLEM SOLVED! “Oh, shit, ‘boosters’? But the off-shore development contract only went through July!” Okay, I’ll try CVS/Walgreens/et. al. If you don’t mind waiting until February, I guess that’s an option. Finally I just gave up and scheduled an appointment within the next two weeks at a clinic 90 minutes away. Then we happened to walk into healthcare provider Kaiser that is ten minutes from home: big fucking arrows and signs, “Walk-ins welcome!!!!11” And so we went back the next day and got our booster shots. But here’s my question/complaint: Kaiser is also the clinic that’s 90 minutes away, where we scheduled our original appointment. On the Kaiser site, there is not a single mention of a walk-in option. My conclusion is that we appear to have to rely on Facebook posts, and rumors from friends to find a booster because the “official” channels are either not useful or just plain abandoned.
- fairity 5y ago
  Is there really nobody attempting to be the single source of truth on where you can get vaccinated? I had the exact same experience as you, but figured I just didn't know where to look. The earliest appointments on my local government website were for weeks out. And, each pharmacy had its own booking website. Surely, there must be someone working on integrating all these fragmented schedules into a single source of truth, and they're just doing a poor job advertising their solution?
  - ryandrake 5y ago
    Another poor UX is: every pharmacy’s scheduling site asks you 500 questions across multiple web pages before finally telling you they have no appointments for two weeks. Start with the goddamn schedule and then after you find a time slot and location that works, THEN ask the questions!
- 5y ago
i_am_proteus 5y ago
See also: https://news.stanford.edu/report/2021/12/16/first-two-weeks-winter-classes/ https://news.stanford.edu/report/2021/12/16/first-two-weeks-... >Classes at Stanford will be online for the first two weeks of the winter quarter. The quarter will still begin Jan. 3 for most students, as scheduled. We will resume in-person instruction Tuesday, Jan. 18, after the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day holiday. We continue to expect students and instructors to be on campus for the winter quarter. >If you are healthy, you are encouraged to come back to campus on-time and get settled. You can return to campus later if you choose to, but we advise against waiting until in-person classes are about to begin. This is because if you return on-schedule, test positive upon arrival and need to isolate for at least 10 days, you will be able to continue your coursework during the online instruction period. Once in-person instruction begins, any accommodations for those in isolation will need to be arranged with individual instructors at their discretion. The reader with an understanding of university finances is encouraged to arrive at his own conclusions.
- ApolloFortyNine 5y ago
  They'll really allow a professor to impact a student who has covid? They're being so careful that they force another booster shot, but if you get covid, you might fail a course? What a great way to artificially lower future covid numbers by having people refuse to self report.
guilhas 5y ago
From "trust the science" to "just take the shot"
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  The science indicates that you should take the shot.
  - thepasswordis 5y ago
    The science indicates that you are likely at a lower risk of having a severe case of covid if you take the shot. Science cannot answer moral questions.
  - emteycz 5y ago
    We're talking about how there is no such science just few comments up. The only link to a scientific article here (that says otherwise) was downvoted into oblivion.
  - commieseatshit 5y ago
  - SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
    Yea, I don’t get what is so hard to understand! The vaccines are partial and waning. I need to get a shot to make sure your works, because you can still get and spread the virus after getting the shot, and then so can I. Then we can discuss boosters. I feel like anyone that doesn’t understand plain and clear logic must be a FauxNews addicted lunatic. What other explanations even are there?
  - guilhas 5y ago
    The science indicates a mild disease for under 50s, is becoming even milder Refusing education for young people because of a booster can only be described as a crime against human rights
debacle 5y ago
Is there a notable difference in case loads between Socal and Norcal? Florida seems to have done relatively well for themselves (unless you buy into conspiracy theories about misreporting case loads), but I wonder if vit D and general level of outsideness plays a big role, but it's hard to make apples to apples comparisons between Florida and e.g. New York.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  I'm a bit baffled by the assertion Florida's doing well. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covid19-death-rates-us-by-state/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covi... NY: 300/100k FL: 289/100k NY's deaths are also more heavily weighted towards the initial outbreak, when the mortality rate was much higher due to lack of treatment knowledge/options. https://imgur.com/a/fdb1tl7 https://imgur.com/a/fdb1tl7
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - notacoward 5y ago
    Also there's plenty of reason to believe that Florida's numbers are serious underestimates. IIRC their testing rate has been low, and they've been in the news for suppressing bad numbers more than once. I might trust numbers from an independent study, but not from anything under the DeSantis regime.
  - krrrh 5y ago
    Florida also has a significantly older population than NY, so those figures should be age-adjusted to take into account COVIDs disparate mortality across age groups. [1] Amongst large states Florida (239) is much closer to California (216) than NY (299) after adjustments, and California had some of the most severe lockdowns, while Florida had some of the most lax. Still, if they merely kept even with NY, and also managed to have a booming economy, a net influx of population, and very little disruption in primary school education, I’d say that’s pretty good. The damage that has been done to a generation of disadvantaged kids in states that shut down schools for extended periods is going to have to be reckoned with for years. [1] https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/ https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-...
qlplan 5y ago
Vaccines aren't that great to stop the spread. We have ample evidence of the fact by looking at the winter 2021 numbers in highly vaccinated regions. They are even less effective against Omicron. Omicron is mild anyway. Heaven forbid that students will experience a "a sore throat, runny nose and a headache": https://www.bbc.com/news/health-59768366 https://www.bbc.com/news/health-59768366
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- throwawaymedia 5y ago
  Why is this one being downvoted when in fact what OP is saying is a 100% truth? Vaccines won't stop the spread because it's a sliding window problem. You vaccinate 10m people today, then you vaccinate 10m people tomorrow, by the time you vaccinate another 10m, the first 10m already lost their antibodies. We'd have to vaccinate the entire population within 4-6 months, which is impossible given the current state of things. There are no transactional guarantees, so to speak. On top of all of that, vaccines do not stop the spread, but just ease out symptoms. You can be vaccinated and your symptoms can be so mild that you won't even know you are sick. So you'll walk around infecting others.
  - random314 5y ago
    - throwawaymedia 5y ago
      Excuse me? There are dozens of papers available now confirming my words.
      - random314 5y ago
        Looking for about half a dozen papers confirming your following words > You vaccinate 10m people today, then you vaccinate 10m people tomorrow, by the time you vaccinate another 10m, the first 10m already lost their antibodies.
benterris 5y ago
What religious exemption is the page referring to ? How are vaccines a religious subject ?
- josephcsible 5y ago
  Every vaccine available in the US was developed or tested using stem cells from aborted babies, and the J&J one is also manufactured with them. A lot of religions forbid intentionally benefiting from others' sins.
  - clint 5y ago
    Isn't this true of nearly every pharmaceutical on the market?
  - justin66 5y ago
    Even the Catholic Church has given the A-OK for its adherents to take these vaccines. At this point, anyone you encounter citing a "religious" objection is more likely to be citing a personal preference.
    - cheeseomlit 5y ago
      Isn't religion supposed to be a deeply personal thing, not necessarily tied to some earthly institution or organization? What if I sincerely believe that complete and total bodily autonomy is a God-given right but I'm not a member of a church who shares my views, are my beliefs invalid?
      - justin66 5y ago
        > Isn't religion supposed to be a deeply personal thing, not necessarily tied to some earthly institution or organization? You are asking the wrong guy, but I'd note that the person I was responding to mentioned sin. That implies some things about which religions he was including, and membership in those religions implies some other things about obedience to religious authority and so on. If you're in the clear with the Catholics and the Baptists when it comes to sinning, that covers a lot of ideological ground. > What if I sincerely believe that complete and total bodily autonomy is a God-given right but I'm not a member of a church who shares my views, are my beliefs invalid? As I implied in my other comment, I do think there's a distinction to be drawn between religion and personal preference. I don't have a really deep take on this, but I'd note that it wouldn't be the first time the law had to take these things into account. I do not know that much about this stuff, but I think being a member of a group (even the Scientologists!) helps if you want your beliefs recognized as religious beliefs. A problem prophets and mystics have had to contend with for quite some time, I imagine.
wjnsjshzb 5y ago
- dymk 5y ago
  How do you know it was the booster that gave you hives? Hives can be caused by many things, and can manifest sporadically.
  - wjnsjshzb 5y ago
    Hives is listed as a side effect for the vaccines. I never had it before and got hives a week after my booster shot. Although I'm not 100% certain, I believe there is a very high likelihood the booster caused it. Apparently many on Reddit experienced the same thing if you search for hives in the COVID subreddits. My friend got hives after her second shot and still needs to use Benadryl after 6 months.
    - dymk 5y ago
      I've had chronic idiopathic urticaria for years, to varying degrees. Hives are a common side effect to many things (which sucks, because it's such an incredibly aggravating symptom). It's possible the vaccine is the cause of yours, and the timing makes sense, but it can happen entirely randomly, and that's the case for at least some people who started experiencing hives alongside their shot. I couldn't stand the drowsy effect from Benadryl. Your friend might want to give Fexofenadine (Allegra / Allerfex) a try, it's just as effective for me and doesn't result in that "head empty" feeling. Loratadine (Claritin) might also work. Costco sells both in bulk generic quantities and they're cheap compared to the branded stuff.
      - wjnsjshzb 5y ago
        I appreciate the Fexofenadine/Allegra recommendation for the non drowsy effect. Thank you.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
danhak 5y ago
[flagged]
- fabian2k 5y ago
  You're misstating the conclusions of that paper. The higher risk for young people only applies to Moderna and the comparison only compares myocarditis, while for a full risk/benefit analysis you need to compare all outcomes. There are countries that only use Biontech for younger people, which is a reasonable way to deal with this if you have plenty of vaccine available.
- vorpalhex 5y ago
  > We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273. 16 in 1,000,000 for two doses. For reference, your chance of being struck by lightning in any given year is 1 in 1,222,000. Oh, and: > This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - danhak 5y ago
    Please look at the subgroup analysis
    - vorpalhex 5y ago
      I am, and I'm not seeing anything drastically different. You realize this paper is combining hospital admissions and deaths as a single figure, right? That means there are duplicates (114 total deaths). Myocarditis is, while something that should be monitored, generally minor especially in otherwise healthy adults. The treatment for it "keep an eye on the patient until myocarditis goes away". Any kind of infection or virus can cause it, as can many most kinds of drugs, and it's rarely a major deal.
oregano 5y ago
No matter which way you cut it- it's shaping up to be another great quarter for big pharma!
- ajdsudnd 5y ago
  This statement would be true regardless or covid
  - cik2e 5y ago
    - Pfizer net income for the quarter ending September 30, 2021 was $8.146B, a 454.53% increase year-over-year. - Pfizer net income for the twelve months ending September 30, 2021 was $19.889B, a 149.36% increase year-over-year. - Pfizer annual net income for 2020 was $9.616B, a 40.91% decline from 2019. - Pfizer annual net income for 2019 was $16.273B, a 45.91% increase from 2018. - Pfizer annual net income for 2018 was $11.153B, a 47.66% decline from 2017. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/net-income https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/net-inc...
    - alphabettsy 5y ago
      Any reason why you omitted the other recent years in which it nearly or more than doubled?
      - cik2e 5y ago
        Fine, the following page shows their net profits from 2006 - 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/266194/net-income-of-pharmaceutical-company-pfizer-since-2006/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/266194/net-income-of-pha... This shows three years of Phizer netting in the neighborhood of 20 billion. This year they've hit 20 billion net in the first nine months. Let's see in a couple of weeks by how much they've blown away their previous record of 22 billion. Ultimately, is there any reason to pretend these profits have nothing to do with the vaccine?
        5y ago
KerryJones 5y ago
Generally curious and would love input from others, but from the research I've done, boosters are not recommended for all people and there was significant misgivings in the FDA officials who approved the booster: - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/25/health/covid-boosters-cdc-fda.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/25/health/covid-boosters-cdc... As it's said a bit in that article, it's important to know that the response to anything should be based on a variety of factors and in this case including severity of getting the virus. From my research, Omicron _is_ similar to getting a common cold. We should be adjusting our response based not only on how transmissible it is but on the consequences of us getting it, but it seems there is a much more black & white approach. When the chance of death was significantly higher in other variants, holding off seeing ones kids made sense, when long-term covid meant going without taste or smell, that's a significant risk. I still see a lot of "do whatever is necessary to not get Covid" -- but that is now not including the severity of what you're getting. If we removed the name "Covid" and considered each to be a separate virus, would "Omicron" be something you freak out about? If I were to do a generalized formula it would be something like: [severity of illness] * [transmissibility] = [strength of response justified] -------- Would love additional data that changes this mindset. * I am vaccinated but not boosted. ------- EDIT: Getting downvoted without responses when I'm looking for genuine information to understand more thoroughly is a pretty poor approach to helping fight C19. It dichotomizes and turns people against each other rather than facilitate discussion or learning.
- wussboy 5y ago
  The answers you are looking for have been posted a million other times in response to a million other questions by millions of other people. To claim that silence on your particular question means there are no answers or that you are correct is disingenuous. We know this, so we downvote.
  - marvin 5y ago
    This is a very uncharitable response. GP wants a legitimate discussion that doesn't have an obvious/well-known/established answer at this point.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ed25519FUUU 5y ago
I (fully vaccinated) wasn’t an anti-vaxxer until Webster literally changed the definition of the word to include those “who oppose regulations mandating vaccination“ I feel pretty good about the safety and efficacy of the current vaccines, but the discourse is poisonous bordering on religious zealotry. What happens when vaccine with genuine safety issues comes along and is mandated? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  I didn’t believe you. I wouldn’t be surprised about the opportunistic chances to push an ideology taken by supposedly apolitical orgs. There are examples all over even if you don’t want to see it. So I was willing to believe that MW made a small addendum to their previous definition of antivaxxer. Despite it being a cheap and dirty abuse of their institution. But no. They removed it entirely and replaced it with exactly what you said. Wtf. Opposing a vaccine mandate for completely precedent and objectifiable legal reasons “now makes” you an antivaxxer huh? Well… I’m new to the club apparently, where do I pick up my Karen haircut and homeopathic treatments?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- jeofken 5y ago
  Wow! That means by just sticking to the until recently common view that humans have the property right to their own body, not the government, now makes me an anti-vaxxer as well.
  - maxerickson 5y ago
    Stanford is a private university, students may face some costs if they dis-enroll, but there is nothing forcing them to continue to attend.
    - 5y ago
jwlake 5y ago
Wonder how many weeks until everyone in CA realizes everyone has already gotten it.
- commieseatshit 5y ago
commieseatshit 5y ago
[flagged]
timr 5y ago
This is a dumb policy. Covid presents essentially no risk to young people. We also now know that the risk of myocarditis to young men from vaccination exceeds the risk of same from the virus itself: https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/uk-now-reports-myocarditis-stratified https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/uk-now-reports-myoca... Moreover, additional vaccination offers minimal -- if any -- benefit to young, healthy people. As Paul Offit -- a pediatrician, creator of the Rotavirus vaccine, member of the CDC ACIP committee and one of the biggest SARS-CoV2 vaccine advocates -- said in a recent NY Times article: > Boosters are likely to provide the best protection against infection with Omicron. But for most healthy young people, the original two-shot series — or one dose of Johnson and Johnson — should be sufficient to prevent hospitalization and death, Dr. Offit said. If that’s the purpose of vaccination, then “these vaccines continue to hold up,” Dr. Offit said. https://archive.fo/b3raO https://archive.fo/b3raO Meanwhile, the WHO continues to beg western countries to stop boosting younger, healthy people. Nobody listens. > The focus of COVID-19 immunization efforts must remain on decreasing death and severe disease, and the protection of the health care system....In the context of ongoing global vaccine supply constraints and inequities, broad-based administration of booster doses risks exacerbating vaccine access by driving up demand in countries with substantial vaccine coverage and diverting supply while priority populations in some countries, or in subnational settings, have not yet received a primary vaccination series. https://www.who.int/news/item/22-12-2021-interim-statement-on-booster-doses-for-covid-19-vaccination---update-22-december-2021 https://www.who.int/news/item/22-12-2021-interim-statement-o... This push for repeated vaccination of the young is based on antibody titers and other "correlates of risk", not on clinical data. But antibody levels decline over time -- particularly in the nasal mucosa. It's basic immunology, and a principal reason that vaccines against respiratory viruses were rare prior to Covid. We're quite literally conducting a societal experiment based on fear and speculation, while "experts" forget what they learned in biology 101.
- random314 5y ago
  The author forgot to include statistical significance in the data. A difference of 1-5 parts per million is statistically insignificant for the study sample size. Also, while focusing on myocarditis he forgets to count actual deaths from covid19 which is increasing for younger people with the new variants. https://theconversation.com/younger-adults-can-get-very-sick-and-die-from-covid-too-heres-what-the-data-tell-us-165250 https://theconversation.com/younger-adults-can-get-very-sick... Death rate per million for age 25 is 100. Yet the author complains about a non statistically significant difference of 1-5 per million of myocarditis for under 40?! Does the author have an agenda you are aware of?
vmception 5y ago
Alright, now you lost me. As someone that complied initially, holed up in an apartment solo for many months while the city descended into chaos, and began testing every 7 days when that became available and staggering interactions between people, I feel like I’ve shown that I’m willing to help mitigation efforts. Boosters for last year’s virus makes less sense. Boosters at all make less sense, especially for a non vulnerable population, and the fairly predictable solution of stacking them every 6 months should come under much more scrutiny. Especially with the unnecessary myocarditis element. The same for cloth masks, if they are less effective against the newer prevalent variant. I’m not sold on this one, and I’ll totally begin bolstering anti-establishment sentiment if they are the only ones willing to disagree.
- GenerocUsername 5y ago
  Welcome to the resistance... its not glamorous, but it is overwhelmingly obviously the right time to be a skeptic.
  - vkou 5y ago
    The skeptics have felt overwhelmingly in the right for the past 21 months, but throughout that time period, reality has not been particularly compliant to their wishes. What reality has shown, time and again, is that medical systems across the entire world are incapable of dealing with COVID while providing the same standard of care that people generally expect. (For both non-COVID and COVID cases.) I personally feel there are reasons to be optimistic over the next few months, but that its too early to say - and claiming otherwise is engaging in very speculative, very wishful magical thinking.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - notacoward 5y ago
      Exactly. The self-professed "skeptics" have only seemed to doubt one narrative (the mainstream one) but have seemed singularly credulous when it comes to alternative theories, treatments, etc. All in an effort to stand out, not to help. Many have even supported multiple mutually exclusive beliefs at different times, pointing to the few hits as evidence of their perspicacity, quietly hoping everyone will forget the misses. The world would be better off with some real skepticism, not just Oppositional Defiant Disorder disguised as skepticism. Real skepticism notes the absence or weakness of evidence behind a claim, but can be overcome as the evidence becomes stronger. True skepticism also does not require assertion of an alternate or opposite theory as Absolute Truth with no more evidence than the theory one is being "skeptical" about. People should ask for - even demand - evidence, but not misportray disagreement (or disagreeableness) as skepticism.
thepasswordis 5y ago
At this point what is the case for vaccine requirements? * They aren't risk free (like we were all told initially) * They don't prevent transmission (like we were all told initially) Full disclosure: fully vaxxed, got it the very first day I was allowed to. Wouldn't change the decision. That said: man I really cannot get over the fact that it feels like public health officials are just straight up lying to us all at this point. That is something that I really do not like for several reasons. Not the least of which is that it will prevent people from trusting them in the future, and that will have negative consequences for everyone.
- yulaow 5y ago
  The point since the start was to prevent serious cases. In my country the only target value under consideration for intensifying/reducing measures is just ICU occupations in hospital, and this rapid increase of cases, even with lower risk of serious cases compared to delta, is seriously jeopardizing our hospitals (again)
  - miles 5y ago
    > The point since the start was to prevent serious cases. It was sold as preventing transmission: It's official: Vaccinated people don't transmit COVID-19 https://fortune.com/2021/04/01/its-official-vaccinated-people-dont-transmit-covid-19/ https://fortune.com/2021/04/01/its-official-vaccinated-peopl... > "Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials but it's also in real-world data," CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky told Rachel Maddow on Monday, March 29.
    - yulaow 5y ago
      I admit I don't know the narrative in the US/CDC. For what I understood reading around on various international news networks the idea it would prevent transmission via reducing the viral charge to almost zero was related to the variant to which the current version of the vaccines were built for. The new variants (delta first and omicron in particular) require new updated and targeted vaccines to keep the viral charge so low to keep avoiding transmission. But again, I am no virologist and my understanding is just a sum of what I read around.
commieseatshit 5y ago
data_dan_ 5y ago
Meanwhile, the Nevada state legislature decided against extending the vaccination requirement for the Nevada System of Higher Education (https://lasvegassun.com/news/2021/dec/21/college-students-in-nevada-wont-need-covid-vaccine/ https://lasvegassun.com/news/2021/dec/21/college-students-in...) and the NSHE board of regents may be on the verge of reversing their staff vaccine mandate instead of firing those who refuse to comply (https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/education/regents-to-reassess-employee-vaccine-mandate-on-eve-of-firing-deadline-2504405/ https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/education/regents-to-rea...).
fucknewsom 5y ago
- fucknewsom 5y ago
  - kyruzic 5y ago
    I mean your username is probably the biggest problem, and claiming he should be shot is just stupid.
fucknewsom 5y ago
FutureZeitgeist 5y ago
fucknewsom 5y ago
fauciisaliar 5y ago
[flagged]
fauciisaliar 5y ago
[flagged]
fauciisaliar 5y ago
LatteLazy 5y ago
It's amazing seeing so many people have such strong opinions on this. Worse still, people make blanket statements or seem to just want to trot out their on conclusions. Why? Can't we all just take a breath? Reddit abortion debates are higher quality than this. Come on.
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
Random question for the HN crowd. Does anyone think that at this point HN is in desperate need of some categorization/filtering capability on the front page (please let me know if it exists, here or in an HN mirror site and I'm missing it)? I'm soooo sick of these Covid threads. They basically never lead anywhere in the comments, it's the same shit over and over, folks presenting their take as unassailable fact. I'm not saying this article is deserving of being flagged, but over the past two years I greatly wish I at least had the capability to just look at "tech articles" vs. everything else. Also, I get it, it's easy to say "just don't look", I'm just asking if anyone else things an easy way to filter out some threads like this would be useful. This sentiment is basically a follow-on to a submission I posted recently, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29532676 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29532676 , where the best consensus seemed to be that it's really not possible to have insightful, thoughtful debate on these sensitive topics, or at least it's the case that the HN threads really aren't that much higher quality on these topics than on other sites, and that's not true for lots of other categories of topics.
- DenisM 5y ago
  I takes less than two minutes to scan the front page to weed out Covid news. How is this a problem?
- mlac 5y ago
  You could set up Inoreader with a filter on it for COVID.
aitchnyu 5y ago
Does booster have same contents as dose 1 or can it use a fraction of the material? I heard about research of mixing vaccines by different manufacturers but not about stretching a dose to more individuals.
iamdamian 5y ago
I'm vaccinated but do not plan to get a booster of the original vaccine. If a new and dangerous variant shows up, and we have a vaccine specifically for that variant, I will consider that new shot, just as I do with yearly flu shots. What many people miss when they advocate for boosters is that antibody count is not the full story. When it comes to protection against severe disease, cell-mediated immunity is key and doesn't go away. Here's the most relevant science I've found about the effectiveness of the booster. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115926 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115926 If you look at the results table, the booster does benefit everyone. I can't argue with that. However, the absolute counts shown in that table paint a more nuanced picture. While the 60+ crowd gets significant benefits from being boosted, making it a no-brainer for them, the under 60 crowd has less benefit. The under 60 crowd is already relatively safe from severe disease and death with the original vaccine dose. Being healthy and under 60, I need to weigh these mild benefits with the cons: 1) normalizing mandated boosters as an ongoing way of life and 2) extending the pandemic by using up booster doses instead of sending them to undervaccinated countries (the ones where new variants are popping up). Instead of getting in the habit of being boosted with the same vaccine every 3-6 months for mild benefit, I think it makes much more sense to take a holistic view that helps us end this pandemic. [Edited for clarity]
- disgruntledphd2 5y ago
  > While the booster does have significant benefits for the 60+ crowd, the benefits are not nearly as great for other age groups. For me, the cons of getting boosted outweigh the pros, and so I won't. Hmmm, interesting. I read that paper and thought, wow, I'm glad I got a booster ;). > What many people miss when they advocate for boosters is that antibody count is not the full story when it comes to protection against severe disease. Cell-mediated immunity is key and doesn't go away. This appears to be very true (although I am not an immunologist). > Instead of boosting our antibody counts ever 3-6 months with the same vaccine and normalizing mandated boosters, I think it makes much more sense to send these to undervaccinated locations where variants are evolving. Sending the boosters to the rest of the world makes far more sense than boosting the general populations in the developed world. We should definitely do both, but if we can only do one then it should be vaccinating as much of the world as possible.
treme 5y ago
Risk of myocarditis following sequential COVID-19 vaccinations by age and sex https://www.reveddit.com/v/COVID19/comments/rofrig/risk_of_myocarditis_following_sequential_covid19/?ps_after=1640482645 https://www.reveddit.com/v/COVID19/comments/rofrig/risk_of_m... Really interesting paper from authors with major roles on advisory committees and public health. This is an important and comprehensive dataset that will absolutely be used to further inform public policy in the UK and abroad. The main take home: "the risk following COVID-19 vaccination was largely restricted to younger males aged less than 40 years, where the risks of myocarditis following vaccination and infection were similar. However, the notable exception was that in younger males receiving a second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine, the risk of myocarditis was higher following vaccination than infection, with an additional 101 events estimated following a second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine compared to 7 events following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. i.e The second dose of "full strength" Moderna in males 13-40 gives a spike in myocarditis that is markedly higher than the risk of myocarditis from covid infection. There weren't enough cases of myocarditis from this very comprehensive dataset to properly assess myocarditis in children aged 13-17, so as the authors state, this now needs to be pursued by pooling international datasets, and I expect they are already pursuing that. Very interesting data, thanks for posting. As I stated elsewhere, this is one piece of the public health puzzle. There are obviously a number of risks and benefits that all feed into the recommendations made. But all else being equal, this data could certainly affect recommendations for Moderna vs other vaccine options in males under 40. Watching with interest, thanks for posting OP! permalinkhide replies (2)author-focusas-ofpreserve [–]a_teletubby113 points4 days, 20 hours ago* (edited 3 hours, 2 minutes after) It's not just a Moderna problem though. Even for Pfizer, we see a weaker but clear signal: Infection: 2.02 (1.13 - 3.61) Dose 1: 1.66 (1.14 - 3.41) Dose 2: 3.41 (2.44 - 4.78) Dose 3: 7.60 (1.92 - 30.15) This is a "bombshell" for the lack of better words. I really wish someone could show this to college administrators who are mandating 3d dose for college students after just 6 months, with no regard for recent breakthrough infections. Edit: I know the CIs overlap, but the fact that the point estimate of infection (2.02) is clearly outside of Dose 2's CI (2.44 - 4.78) is already concerning. I'm merely advocating for caution for healthy young males for whom Covid is a miniscule threat.
bern4444 5y ago
I truly don't understand what is so difficult about getting the booster shot. Outside of that, a private institution is absolutely allowed to make a rule like this. If you don't want to get a booster shot that's fine - the government should not force you to do so, but that action has consequences. Private - and several public - institutions should impose vaccine requirements as they deem fit. I want to be able to go see a play, or a movie, or to a restaurant without fear that I'm putting myself more at risk because someone at the table next to me got a vaccine 8 months ago and is no longer protected and far more likely to be carrying and spreading covid. I want to be able to see friends and then my family without having to wait days at a time in between to get a covid test result back because places are allowing not fully vaccinated people in. My personal belief is that fully vaccinated should, today, equate to the initial vaccine plus the booster. I expect it might even further change to include a second booster. I have a difficult time understanding why compliance with a life saving decision that is in the best interest of the individual as well as society is so hard. Reasonable exceptions should continue to exist. If you choose not to get a booster then I don't want you to be able to continuously put me at risk. I fully support mandates by private and public entities. This does not mean I will always do so - I'm not playing the slippery slope argument fallacy game. For covid booster shots I would be in full support of a government mandate.
- iamdamian 5y ago
  > I want to be able to go see a play, or a movie, or to a restaurant without fear that I'm putting myself more at risk because someone at the table next to me got a vaccine 8 months ago Why do you believe that you're any more at risk in this situation if you're boosted? > ... and is no longer protected and far more likely to be carrying and spreading covid Antibody levels are not the full story. Cell-based immunity remains intact without boosters and is key to preventing hospitalization/death.
  - bern4444 5y ago
    > Why do you believe that you're any more at risk in this situation if you're boosted? Covid spreads far more easily indoors. Breakthrough cases are becoming more common. Group immunity through boosters (or exposure) is more effective at preventing the spread of covid and reduces the chance that any one individual will catch COVID (and continue to spread it). > Cell-based immunity remains intact without boosters and is key to preventing hospitalization/death. Source? And further, preventing hospitalization and death is great - but we should aim to do better, preventing sickness, stopping the spread, reducing the chance of mutation etc which is what the vaccines (initial and boosters) enable. ETA: in another of your comments you cited an article with this conclusion: "Across the age groups studied, rates of confirmed Covid-19 and severe illness were substantially lower among participants who received a booster dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine than among those who did not." and still somehow came to the conclusion that not getting boosted is better for society.
faangiq 5y ago
Race to the bottom. Faster!
- dennis_jeeves 5y ago
heybecker 5y ago
Y'all are overthinking this. The answer is "Do Not Identify". Your vax status is between you and your doctor.
slenk 5y ago
I don't understand how this is any different than the normal vaccines that are required for you to attend public and private universities. This isn't a new concept.
PaulHoule 5y ago
I know Cornell requires me (staff) to get a booster by February. I was looking for one in early December and couldn't get one in Ithaca in the near future so I wound up booking a shot three weeks later (this week) in Cortland, the next town over. It was surreal being right next to a student outbreak with 1000+ positives but having almost no transmission to faculty and staff.
- nostrebored 5y ago
  [flagged]
- jdavis703 5y ago
  Aren’t faculty and staff generally already socially distanced from students — even before the pandemic? It’s not like pre-K.
- CydeWeys 5y ago
  Sounds like the students are partying outside of school hours and the professors aren't. Also dorm/shared living can't be helping either.
  - johnchristopher 5y ago
    Aren't they partying together all day in a classroom anyway ?
    - PaulHoule 5y ago
      The administration claimed that there was no evidence of transmission in classroom situations and I'm certain that what true up until the surge at the very end. I work in a unit that runs a web site and we were all sent home early in the pandemic. Students came back the academic year after that but I think we had only two staffers from my unit who were authorized to come back to the office that year. In that time frame Cornell kept in-person instruction running, they were testing all students twice a week. My unit returned to the office last summer, they restarted instruction with most students being tested on a once weekly schedule. There was a panic early in the semester with the delta variant being brought in by incoming students so we had strict mask requirements both indoors and dense outdoor situations. Throughout most of the fall 2021 semester both Cornell and Tompkins County were testing about 5000 people a day, Tompkins was getting about 50 positives a day, Cornell more like 5. At the end of the semester we had the Omicron outbreak that was featured on CNN. Myself I have very little contact with undergraduates at all, my unit has only a handful of interns, once in a while I talk to undergraduates waiting in line for food or at the library or something. I've tried to sort out the social hierarchy of frats and sororities by how expensive the cars are in the parking lots are but other than that I know nothing at all about their partying habits. My son and I almost went to that anime convention at the Javits Center which had an Omicron outbreak but couldn't get tickets for Saturday so we settled for going to the comic-con in Scranton (in an equally overdense environment that seems outright cruel to the socially awkward attendees, some of whom we saw cowering under tables.) Looking back we're glad we didn't go because I bet attendees of that convention spread the virus all over the Northeast.
danappelxx 5y ago
All the universities in the UC system are also requiring booster shots by end of January.
Proven 5y ago
And then another one by end of September... I wonder if we'll get to the point where they require a booster shot every month or every week and how many people would still comply at that point.
mistrial9 5y ago
compliance !== safety
- verdverm 5y ago
  I think you're being down voted for using JS syntax. You should really only need != I think your statement applies equally well to many other things. Computer Security popped into my head when I read it.
vaccin8 5y ago
There’s a lot of extremism on both sides. I’m vaccinated, boosted etc. and very much pro-vaccine, however, I try to avoid extremism and I also like to understand the non-extremist opposition to my view. As such, I’ve been trying to find the non-extremist[1] anti-vaccine argument… but I’ve struggled. I guess this is as good a place as any: anyone here want to share their own anti-vax thoughts, or the thoughts of someone anti-vax that they respect? [1] I define extremist as the satanism / 5g microchip stuff.
- lowkey_ 5y ago
  Preliminary note: I don't claim to be an expert in any field relevant to vaccines. This is just an everyday layman's opinion. (Also, I'm vaccinated and boosted as well). I think "anti-vax" sounds inherently extremist and conspiracy-theorist, and isn't an accurate representation of the middle ground here. To be fair, it's more like "pro-choice." Plenty of vaccines are given to children every year and required for them to attend school, and there hasn't really been any negative side-effects of that policy. It's tough to argue that we should not be required to have any vaccine to attend school, and that would break the status quo in the other direction. The question then becomes: What could make the Covid vaccine different from other vaccines, such that it shouldn't be required? * If these vaccines were approved earlier and with more early-stage preliminary data than other vaccines? * If Covid is not as severe as the diseases we currently require a vaccine for? [1] [1] The current required vaccines for school in New York, for example, are Diphtheria, Hepatitis B, Measles, Polio, and Chickenpox. The mortality rate and permanent damage for some of these diseases are much higher than Covid. With others, I'm not sure of the pre-vaccine mortality rate as it's been around for a long time. With all that in mind, Covid spreads as much if not more as the diseases we saw fit to require vaccinations against, and the mortality rate for the older population is high. I think a fair argument is whether schoolchildren should have to be vaccinated to protect against infecting the more vulnerable population.
  - md_ 5y ago
    This is an excellent analysis, and I wish we saw more of these comparisons. The status quo (which differs by country!) for compulsory or somewhat-compulsory vaccination provides a great benchmark for what's seemingly "reasonable." I think that benchmark--and your analysis seems to show similarly--suggests most developed countries are sorta fine with compulsory vaccines for diseases like Covid. But looking at things through this lens helps contextualize and normalize the current policies--people who are concerned about Covid vaccines might feel a lot better when the vaccine is put into perspective.
stri8ed 5y ago
Given the relative weakness of the (current) vaccines vs Omnicron, do these mandates make any sense, or is it largely security theatre at this point?
- adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
  there is pretty good evidence that a booster provides relatively strong protection at least in the short term
- tmp_anon_22 5y ago
  I believe there is data that fully vaccinated individuals on average have less severe symptoms and significantly fewer hospitalizations. Feel free to refute (I don't have time at the moment to look it up) but I feel confident saying that.
- mentos 5y ago
  [flagged]
- jimbob45 5y ago
  Put yourself in the shoes of the school leadership. They need to weigh the negative publicity from this mandate against the potential negative publicity of an unvaccinated outbreak at their school (or god forbid, death(s)). It's really a no-brainer without even plugging the numbers in.
  - aantix 5y ago
    If the motivation is to avoid bad publicity, isn't that security theater?
- rurp 5y ago
  There's a lot of room between 95% effective and useless. From everything I've read the vaccines are still a significant help, especially for preventing severe cases, even if they are less effective than against previous waves.
  - 5y ago
HarryHirsch 5y ago
You'd wish there were adapted vaccines and especially nasal vaccines, but that's not even on the government's radar. Where's the revolution?
- stri8ed 5y ago
  There are some oral vaccines in development - https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/israels-oramed-gets-vietnam-pre-order-10-mln-covid-19-vaccine-doses-2021-12-29/ https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    Nasal, too. https://news.yale.edu/2021/12/10/nasal-vaccine-may-aid-fight-against-new-viral-variants https://news.yale.edu/2021/12/10/nasal-vaccine-may-aid-fight...
    - HarryHirsch 5y ago
      I know. It's the lack of discussion in the media that's worrying.
      - xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
        I've seen tons of media coverage about oral and nasal vaccines, what are you talking about?
- adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
  yes it is, pfizer and moderna are already testing omicron specific vaccines.

180 points by montefischer 5y ago

Fascinating honesty in a lot of comments in this thread. HN trends liberal and the sentiment here feels growing frustration with how gov, corps, schools are handling things. I sense the general population is turning a corner, where despite what your politics are on the vaccine, everyone is over it and will demand life prior to covid.

md_ 5y ago
- DenisM 5y ago
  Please don’t do this. From the guidelines: Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - Der_Einzige 5y ago
    Sorry, this rule is another example of rules that should be removed from HN. This thread does indeed look astroturfed to all hell and the current role encourages users to ignore it. Dang and the rest of HN needs to seriously consider reforming this rule rather than sticking their fingers in their ears and going "lalalala" as this stuff happens.
    - mardifoufs 5y ago
      What makes you say this thread is astroturfed? This is a controversial subject that usually leads to more emotional debate, but there's absolutely nothing to indicate astroturfing. The word does not mean "opinions I don't agree with" and isn't even synonymous with brigading (which I don't see any proof of either)
  - throwaway40FA 5y ago
    If you turn on showdead and have a scroll through the second page here you might come to agree with the parent.
throwaway40FA 5y ago

tomohawk 5y ago

Posted earlier. Related. One student's response. https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/life-is-too-short-to-be-miserable https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/life-is-too-shor...

allturtles 5y ago
This response is directed at the plan to delay in-person instruction (and the assumption that other campus restrictions will follow), not to the booster mandate that is the headline here.

drno123 5y ago

What happens with immune system if you get booster shots every 3 months for, let’s say, 3 years?

throwawaymedia 5y ago
Nobody knows.
- falcolas 5y ago
  Only because we haven’t had 3 years to study. We have lots of data about the impact of the vaccine so far though, and its largely positive.
  - throwawaymedia 5y ago
    According to what we have today there is no need to vaccinate healthy young people.
    - drno123 5y ago
      According to what we know, if you have recovered from delta variant you have much stronger and longer-lasting immunity then if you get vaccinated against original Wuhan strain. Yet, EU Covid pass is valid for 12 months post vaccination and only 6 months post recovery.
aeternum 5y ago
pm90 5y ago
Presumably not much. If you look at the amount of antibodies produced they’re a pretty insignificant amount (if that’s what the concern is).
- kyruzic 5y ago
  How about we stop presuming things and do some actual science. This is supposedly one of the most prestigious universities in the world throwing out the foundations for modern thought in the name of fear and profits for the greediest companies in the entire world. Their slogan is literally "the wind of freedom blows". Has the wind stopped blowing?

marvin 5y ago

Does anyone have a summary of the current science regarding the third vaccine shot for covid? I had the impression that the safety effect for someone in good health under 45 was neglible, although with a significant decrease in risk of catching or passing on the virus. With these effects waning on a time-scale similar to the first two doses. Particularly curious regarding the risk-benefit ratio for a healthy young adult. How much of a no-brainer is an extra vaccine dose at this point? And do we know something yet about a decrease in the «no sense of smell» long-term complication?

elzbardico 5y ago
Science like in peer-reviewed long term Randomized Clinical Trials? I couldn't find much, it looks like it is basically navigating from the seat of the pants and let's measure it later.
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  Well that seems dangerous. Imagine the reaction if they get something wrong, the next time it won’t be just divisive, it’ll be war.
bryan0 5y ago
Boosters are beneficial even if you’re under 45: https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-12-09/large-studies-shows-huge-benefit-of-covid-19-booster-shots https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2021-12-09/large-studi... Edit: critical to beneficial
- MaxHoppersGhost 5y ago
  Your article says they are beneficial, not critical.
  - bryan0 5y ago
    Thanks I updated my comment
- 5y ago

mikestew 5y ago

I’m all for requiring booster shots for $ACTIVITY, but we need to collectively get our shit together on informing folks of how to get said booster. Or maybe it’s just Washington. I was looking for a booster, so I went to our handy state Department of Health website for the vaccine locator. Nearly every single listing said something to the effect of “last updated: three months ago”. IOW, the site is now abandoned and unmaintained because, hey, we rolled out those vaccines and PROBLEM SOLVED! “Oh, shit, ‘boosters’? But the off-shore development contract only went through July!” Okay, I’ll try CVS/Walgreens/et. al. If you don’t mind waiting until February, I guess that’s an option. Finally I just gave up and scheduled an appointment within the next two weeks at a clinic 90 minutes away. Then we happened to walk into healthcare provider Kaiser that is ten minutes from home: big fucking arrows and signs, “Walk-ins welcome!!!!11” And so we went back the next day and got our booster shots. But here’s my question/complaint: Kaiser is also the clinic that’s 90 minutes away, where we scheduled our original appointment. On the Kaiser site, there is not a single mention of a walk-in option. My conclusion is that we appear to have to rely on Facebook posts, and rumors from friends to find a booster because the “official” channels are either not useful or just plain abandoned.

fairity 5y ago
Is there really nobody attempting to be the single source of truth on where you can get vaccinated? I had the exact same experience as you, but figured I just didn't know where to look. The earliest appointments on my local government website were for weeks out. And, each pharmacy had its own booking website. Surely, there must be someone working on integrating all these fragmented schedules into a single source of truth, and they're just doing a poor job advertising their solution?
- ryandrake 5y ago
  Another poor UX is: every pharmacy’s scheduling site asks you 500 questions across multiple web pages before finally telling you they have no appointments for two weeks. Start with the goddamn schedule and then after you find a time slot and location that works, THEN ask the questions!
5y ago

i_am_proteus 5y ago

See also: https://news.stanford.edu/report/2021/12/16/first-two-weeks-winter-classes/ https://news.stanford.edu/report/2021/12/16/first-two-weeks-... >Classes at Stanford will be online for the first two weeks of the winter quarter. The quarter will still begin Jan. 3 for most students, as scheduled. We will resume in-person instruction Tuesday, Jan. 18, after the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day holiday. We continue to expect students and instructors to be on campus for the winter quarter. >If you are healthy, you are encouraged to come back to campus on-time and get settled. You can return to campus later if you choose to, but we advise against waiting until in-person classes are about to begin. This is because if you return on-schedule, test positive upon arrival and need to isolate for at least 10 days, you will be able to continue your coursework during the online instruction period. Once in-person instruction begins, any accommodations for those in isolation will need to be arranged with individual instructors at their discretion. The reader with an understanding of university finances is encouraged to arrive at his own conclusions.

ApolloFortyNine 5y ago
They'll really allow a professor to impact a student who has covid? They're being so careful that they force another booster shot, but if you get covid, you might fail a course? What a great way to artificially lower future covid numbers by having people refuse to self report.

guilhas 5y ago

From "trust the science" to "just take the shot"

ceejayoz 5y ago
The science indicates that you should take the shot.
- thepasswordis 5y ago
  The science indicates that you are likely at a lower risk of having a severe case of covid if you take the shot. Science cannot answer moral questions.
- emteycz 5y ago
  We're talking about how there is no such science just few comments up. The only link to a scientific article here (that says otherwise) was downvoted into oblivion.
- commieseatshit 5y ago
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  Yea, I don’t get what is so hard to understand! The vaccines are partial and waning. I need to get a shot to make sure your works, because you can still get and spread the virus after getting the shot, and then so can I. Then we can discuss boosters. I feel like anyone that doesn’t understand plain and clear logic must be a FauxNews addicted lunatic. What other explanations even are there?
- guilhas 5y ago
  The science indicates a mild disease for under 50s, is becoming even milder Refusing education for young people because of a booster can only be described as a crime against human rights

debacle 5y ago

Is there a notable difference in case loads between Socal and Norcal? Florida seems to have done relatively well for themselves (unless you buy into conspiracy theories about misreporting case loads), but I wonder if vit D and general level of outsideness plays a big role, but it's hard to make apples to apples comparisons between Florida and e.g. New York.

ceejayoz 5y ago
I'm a bit baffled by the assertion Florida's doing well. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covid19-death-rates-us-by-state/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covi... NY: 300/100k FL: 289/100k NY's deaths are also more heavily weighted towards the initial outbreak, when the mortality rate was much higher due to lack of treatment knowledge/options. https://imgur.com/a/fdb1tl7 https://imgur.com/a/fdb1tl7
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- notacoward 5y ago
  Also there's plenty of reason to believe that Florida's numbers are serious underestimates. IIRC their testing rate has been low, and they've been in the news for suppressing bad numbers more than once. I might trust numbers from an independent study, but not from anything under the DeSantis regime.
- krrrh 5y ago
  Florida also has a significantly older population than NY, so those figures should be age-adjusted to take into account COVIDs disparate mortality across age groups. [1] Amongst large states Florida (239) is much closer to California (216) than NY (299) after adjustments, and California had some of the most severe lockdowns, while Florida had some of the most lax. Still, if they merely kept even with NY, and also managed to have a booming economy, a net influx of population, and very little disruption in primary school education, I’d say that’s pretty good. The damage that has been done to a generation of disadvantaged kids in states that shut down schools for extended periods is going to have to be reckoned with for years. [1] https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/ https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-...

qlplan 5y ago

Vaccines aren't that great to stop the spread. We have ample evidence of the fact by looking at the winter 2021 numbers in highly vaccinated regions. They are even less effective against Omicron. Omicron is mild anyway. Heaven forbid that students will experience a "a sore throat, runny nose and a headache": https://www.bbc.com/news/health-59768366 https://www.bbc.com/news/health-59768366

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
throwawaymedia 5y ago
Why is this one being downvoted when in fact what OP is saying is a 100% truth? Vaccines won't stop the spread because it's a sliding window problem. You vaccinate 10m people today, then you vaccinate 10m people tomorrow, by the time you vaccinate another 10m, the first 10m already lost their antibodies. We'd have to vaccinate the entire population within 4-6 months, which is impossible given the current state of things. There are no transactional guarantees, so to speak. On top of all of that, vaccines do not stop the spread, but just ease out symptoms. You can be vaccinated and your symptoms can be so mild that you won't even know you are sick. So you'll walk around infecting others.
- random314 5y ago
  - throwawaymedia 5y ago
    Excuse me? There are dozens of papers available now confirming my words.
    - random314 5y ago
      Looking for about half a dozen papers confirming your following words > You vaccinate 10m people today, then you vaccinate 10m people tomorrow, by the time you vaccinate another 10m, the first 10m already lost their antibodies.

benterris 5y ago

What religious exemption is the page referring to ? How are vaccines a religious subject ?

josephcsible 5y ago
Every vaccine available in the US was developed or tested using stem cells from aborted babies, and the J&J one is also manufactured with them. A lot of religions forbid intentionally benefiting from others' sins.
- clint 5y ago
  Isn't this true of nearly every pharmaceutical on the market?
- justin66 5y ago
  Even the Catholic Church has given the A-OK for its adherents to take these vaccines. At this point, anyone you encounter citing a "religious" objection is more likely to be citing a personal preference.
  - cheeseomlit 5y ago
    Isn't religion supposed to be a deeply personal thing, not necessarily tied to some earthly institution or organization? What if I sincerely believe that complete and total bodily autonomy is a God-given right but I'm not a member of a church who shares my views, are my beliefs invalid?
    - justin66 5y ago
      > Isn't religion supposed to be a deeply personal thing, not necessarily tied to some earthly institution or organization? You are asking the wrong guy, but I'd note that the person I was responding to mentioned sin. That implies some things about which religions he was including, and membership in those religions implies some other things about obedience to religious authority and so on. If you're in the clear with the Catholics and the Baptists when it comes to sinning, that covers a lot of ideological ground. > What if I sincerely believe that complete and total bodily autonomy is a God-given right but I'm not a member of a church who shares my views, are my beliefs invalid? As I implied in my other comment, I do think there's a distinction to be drawn between religion and personal preference. I don't have a really deep take on this, but I'd note that it wouldn't be the first time the law had to take these things into account. I do not know that much about this stuff, but I think being a member of a group (even the Scientologists!) helps if you want your beliefs recognized as religious beliefs. A problem prophets and mystics have had to contend with for quite some time, I imagine.

wjnsjshzb 5y ago

dymk 5y ago
How do you know it was the booster that gave you hives? Hives can be caused by many things, and can manifest sporadically.
- wjnsjshzb 5y ago
  Hives is listed as a side effect for the vaccines. I never had it before and got hives a week after my booster shot. Although I'm not 100% certain, I believe there is a very high likelihood the booster caused it. Apparently many on Reddit experienced the same thing if you search for hives in the COVID subreddits. My friend got hives after her second shot and still needs to use Benadryl after 6 months.
  - dymk 5y ago
    I've had chronic idiopathic urticaria for years, to varying degrees. Hives are a common side effect to many things (which sucks, because it's such an incredibly aggravating symptom). It's possible the vaccine is the cause of yours, and the timing makes sense, but it can happen entirely randomly, and that's the case for at least some people who started experiencing hives alongside their shot. I couldn't stand the drowsy effect from Benadryl. Your friend might want to give Fexofenadine (Allegra / Allerfex) a try, it's just as effective for me and doesn't result in that "head empty" feeling. Loratadine (Claritin) might also work. Costco sells both in bulk generic quantities and they're cheap compared to the branded stuff.
    - wjnsjshzb 5y ago
      I appreciate the Fexofenadine/Allegra recommendation for the non drowsy effect. Thank you.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

danhak 5y ago

[flagged]

fabian2k 5y ago
You're misstating the conclusions of that paper. The higher risk for young people only applies to Moderna and the comparison only compares myocarditis, while for a full risk/benefit analysis you need to compare all outcomes. There are countries that only use Biontech for younger people, which is a reasonable way to deal with this if you have plenty of vaccine available.
vorpalhex 5y ago
> We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273. 16 in 1,000,000 for two doses. For reference, your chance of being struck by lightning in any given year is 1 in 1,222,000. Oh, and: > This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- danhak 5y ago
  Please look at the subgroup analysis
  - vorpalhex 5y ago
    I am, and I'm not seeing anything drastically different. You realize this paper is combining hospital admissions and deaths as a single figure, right? That means there are duplicates (114 total deaths). Myocarditis is, while something that should be monitored, generally minor especially in otherwise healthy adults. The treatment for it "keep an eye on the patient until myocarditis goes away". Any kind of infection or virus can cause it, as can many most kinds of drugs, and it's rarely a major deal.

oregano 5y ago

No matter which way you cut it- it's shaping up to be another great quarter for big pharma!

ajdsudnd 5y ago
This statement would be true regardless or covid
- cik2e 5y ago
  - Pfizer net income for the quarter ending September 30, 2021 was $8.146B, a 454.53% increase year-over-year. - Pfizer net income for the twelve months ending September 30, 2021 was $19.889B, a 149.36% increase year-over-year. - Pfizer annual net income for 2020 was $9.616B, a 40.91% decline from 2019. - Pfizer annual net income for 2019 was $16.273B, a 45.91% increase from 2018. - Pfizer annual net income for 2018 was $11.153B, a 47.66% decline from 2017. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/net-income https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PFE/pfizer/net-inc...
  - alphabettsy 5y ago
    Any reason why you omitted the other recent years in which it nearly or more than doubled?
    - cik2e 5y ago
      Fine, the following page shows their net profits from 2006 - 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/266194/net-income-of-pharmaceutical-company-pfizer-since-2006/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/266194/net-income-of-pha... This shows three years of Phizer netting in the neighborhood of 20 billion. This year they've hit 20 billion net in the first nine months. Let's see in a couple of weeks by how much they've blown away their previous record of 22 billion. Ultimately, is there any reason to pretend these profits have nothing to do with the vaccine?
      - 5y ago

KerryJones 5y ago

Generally curious and would love input from others, but from the research I've done, boosters are not recommended for all people and there was significant misgivings in the FDA officials who approved the booster: - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/25/health/covid-boosters-cdc-fda.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/25/health/covid-boosters-cdc... As it's said a bit in that article, it's important to know that the response to anything should be based on a variety of factors and in this case including severity of getting the virus. From my research, Omicron _is_ similar to getting a common cold. We should be adjusting our response based not only on how transmissible it is but on the consequences of us getting it, but it seems there is a much more black & white approach. When the chance of death was significantly higher in other variants, holding off seeing ones kids made sense, when long-term covid meant going without taste or smell, that's a significant risk. I still see a lot of "do whatever is necessary to not get Covid" -- but that is now not including the severity of what you're getting. If we removed the name "Covid" and considered each to be a separate virus, would "Omicron" be something you freak out about? If I were to do a generalized formula it would be something like: [severity of illness] * [transmissibility] = [strength of response justified] -------- Would love additional data that changes this mindset. * I am vaccinated but not boosted. ------- EDIT: Getting downvoted without responses when I'm looking for genuine information to understand more thoroughly is a pretty poor approach to helping fight C19. It dichotomizes and turns people against each other rather than facilitate discussion or learning.

wussboy 5y ago
The answers you are looking for have been posted a million other times in response to a million other questions by millions of other people. To claim that silence on your particular question means there are no answers or that you are correct is disingenuous. We know this, so we downvote.
- marvin 5y ago
  This is a very uncharitable response. GP wants a legitimate discussion that doesn't have an obvious/well-known/established answer at this point.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

ed25519FUUU 5y ago

I (fully vaccinated) wasn’t an anti-vaxxer until Webster literally changed the definition of the word to include those “who oppose regulations mandating vaccination“ I feel pretty good about the safety and efficacy of the current vaccines, but the discourse is poisonous bordering on religious zealotry. What happens when vaccine with genuine safety issues comes along and is mandated? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer

SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
I didn’t believe you. I wouldn’t be surprised about the opportunistic chances to push an ideology taken by supposedly apolitical orgs. There are examples all over even if you don’t want to see it. So I was willing to believe that MW made a small addendum to their previous definition of antivaxxer. Despite it being a cheap and dirty abuse of their institution. But no. They removed it entirely and replaced it with exactly what you said. Wtf. Opposing a vaccine mandate for completely precedent and objectifiable legal reasons “now makes” you an antivaxxer huh? Well… I’m new to the club apparently, where do I pick up my Karen haircut and homeopathic treatments?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
jeofken 5y ago
Wow! That means by just sticking to the until recently common view that humans have the property right to their own body, not the government, now makes me an anti-vaxxer as well.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  Stanford is a private university, students may face some costs if they dis-enroll, but there is nothing forcing them to continue to attend.
  - 5y ago

jwlake 5y ago

Wonder how many weeks until everyone in CA realizes everyone has already gotten it.

commieseatshit 5y ago

commieseatshit 5y ago

[flagged]

timr 5y ago

This is a dumb policy. Covid presents essentially no risk to young people. We also now know that the risk of myocarditis to young men from vaccination exceeds the risk of same from the virus itself: https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/uk-now-reports-myocarditis-stratified https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/uk-now-reports-myoca... Moreover, additional vaccination offers minimal -- if any -- benefit to young, healthy people. As Paul Offit -- a pediatrician, creator of the Rotavirus vaccine, member of the CDC ACIP committee and one of the biggest SARS-CoV2 vaccine advocates -- said in a recent NY Times article: > Boosters are likely to provide the best protection against infection with Omicron. But for most healthy young people, the original two-shot series — or one dose of Johnson and Johnson — should be sufficient to prevent hospitalization and death, Dr. Offit said. If that’s the purpose of vaccination, then “these vaccines continue to hold up,” Dr. Offit said. https://archive.fo/b3raO https://archive.fo/b3raO Meanwhile, the WHO continues to beg western countries to stop boosting younger, healthy people. Nobody listens. > The focus of COVID-19 immunization efforts must remain on decreasing death and severe disease, and the protection of the health care system....In the context of ongoing global vaccine supply constraints and inequities, broad-based administration of booster doses risks exacerbating vaccine access by driving up demand in countries with substantial vaccine coverage and diverting supply while priority populations in some countries, or in subnational settings, have not yet received a primary vaccination series. https://www.who.int/news/item/22-12-2021-interim-statement-on-booster-doses-for-covid-19-vaccination---update-22-december-2021 https://www.who.int/news/item/22-12-2021-interim-statement-o... This push for repeated vaccination of the young is based on antibody titers and other "correlates of risk", not on clinical data. But antibody levels decline over time -- particularly in the nasal mucosa. It's basic immunology, and a principal reason that vaccines against respiratory viruses were rare prior to Covid. We're quite literally conducting a societal experiment based on fear and speculation, while "experts" forget what they learned in biology 101.

random314 5y ago
The author forgot to include statistical significance in the data. A difference of 1-5 parts per million is statistically insignificant for the study sample size. Also, while focusing on myocarditis he forgets to count actual deaths from covid19 which is increasing for younger people with the new variants. https://theconversation.com/younger-adults-can-get-very-sick-and-die-from-covid-too-heres-what-the-data-tell-us-165250 https://theconversation.com/younger-adults-can-get-very-sick... Death rate per million for age 25 is 100. Yet the author complains about a non statistically significant difference of 1-5 per million of myocarditis for under 40?! Does the author have an agenda you are aware of?

vmception 5y ago

Alright, now you lost me. As someone that complied initially, holed up in an apartment solo for many months while the city descended into chaos, and began testing every 7 days when that became available and staggering interactions between people, I feel like I’ve shown that I’m willing to help mitigation efforts. Boosters for last year’s virus makes less sense. Boosters at all make less sense, especially for a non vulnerable population, and the fairly predictable solution of stacking them every 6 months should come under much more scrutiny. Especially with the unnecessary myocarditis element. The same for cloth masks, if they are less effective against the newer prevalent variant. I’m not sold on this one, and I’ll totally begin bolstering anti-establishment sentiment if they are the only ones willing to disagree.

GenerocUsername 5y ago
Welcome to the resistance... its not glamorous, but it is overwhelmingly obviously the right time to be a skeptic.
- vkou 5y ago
  The skeptics have felt overwhelmingly in the right for the past 21 months, but throughout that time period, reality has not been particularly compliant to their wishes. What reality has shown, time and again, is that medical systems across the entire world are incapable of dealing with COVID while providing the same standard of care that people generally expect. (For both non-COVID and COVID cases.) I personally feel there are reasons to be optimistic over the next few months, but that its too early to say - and claiming otherwise is engaging in very speculative, very wishful magical thinking.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - notacoward 5y ago
    Exactly. The self-professed "skeptics" have only seemed to doubt one narrative (the mainstream one) but have seemed singularly credulous when it comes to alternative theories, treatments, etc. All in an effort to stand out, not to help. Many have even supported multiple mutually exclusive beliefs at different times, pointing to the few hits as evidence of their perspicacity, quietly hoping everyone will forget the misses. The world would be better off with some real skepticism, not just Oppositional Defiant Disorder disguised as skepticism. Real skepticism notes the absence or weakness of evidence behind a claim, but can be overcome as the evidence becomes stronger. True skepticism also does not require assertion of an alternate or opposite theory as Absolute Truth with no more evidence than the theory one is being "skeptical" about. People should ask for - even demand - evidence, but not misportray disagreement (or disagreeableness) as skepticism.

thepasswordis 5y ago

At this point what is the case for vaccine requirements? * They aren't risk free (like we were all told initially) * They don't prevent transmission (like we were all told initially) Full disclosure: fully vaxxed, got it the very first day I was allowed to. Wouldn't change the decision. That said: man I really cannot get over the fact that it feels like public health officials are just straight up lying to us all at this point. That is something that I really do not like for several reasons. Not the least of which is that it will prevent people from trusting them in the future, and that will have negative consequences for everyone.

yulaow 5y ago
The point since the start was to prevent serious cases. In my country the only target value under consideration for intensifying/reducing measures is just ICU occupations in hospital, and this rapid increase of cases, even with lower risk of serious cases compared to delta, is seriously jeopardizing our hospitals (again)
- miles 5y ago
  > The point since the start was to prevent serious cases. It was sold as preventing transmission: It's official: Vaccinated people don't transmit COVID-19 https://fortune.com/2021/04/01/its-official-vaccinated-people-dont-transmit-covid-19/ https://fortune.com/2021/04/01/its-official-vaccinated-peopl... > "Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials but it's also in real-world data," CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky told Rachel Maddow on Monday, March 29.
  - yulaow 5y ago
    I admit I don't know the narrative in the US/CDC. For what I understood reading around on various international news networks the idea it would prevent transmission via reducing the viral charge to almost zero was related to the variant to which the current version of the vaccines were built for. The new variants (delta first and omicron in particular) require new updated and targeted vaccines to keep the viral charge so low to keep avoiding transmission. But again, I am no virologist and my understanding is just a sum of what I read around.

commieseatshit 5y ago

data_dan_ 5y ago

Meanwhile, the Nevada state legislature decided against extending the vaccination requirement for the Nevada System of Higher Education (https://lasvegassun.com/news/2021/dec/21/college-students-in-nevada-wont-need-covid-vaccine/ https://lasvegassun.com/news/2021/dec/21/college-students-in...) and the NSHE board of regents may be on the verge of reversing their staff vaccine mandate instead of firing those who refuse to comply (https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/education/regents-to-reassess-employee-vaccine-mandate-on-eve-of-firing-deadline-2504405/ https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/education/regents-to-rea...).

fucknewsom 5y ago

fucknewsom 5y ago
- kyruzic 5y ago
  I mean your username is probably the biggest problem, and claiming he should be shot is just stupid.

fucknewsom 5y ago

FutureZeitgeist 5y ago

fucknewsom 5y ago

fauciisaliar 5y ago

[flagged]

fauciisaliar 5y ago

[flagged]

fauciisaliar 5y ago

LatteLazy 5y ago

It's amazing seeing so many people have such strong opinions on this. Worse still, people make blanket statements or seem to just want to trot out their on conclusions. Why? Can't we all just take a breath? Reddit abortion debates are higher quality than this. Come on.

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

Random question for the HN crowd. Does anyone think that at this point HN is in desperate need of some categorization/filtering capability on the front page (please let me know if it exists, here or in an HN mirror site and I'm missing it)? I'm soooo sick of these Covid threads. They basically never lead anywhere in the comments, it's the same shit over and over, folks presenting their take as unassailable fact. I'm not saying this article is deserving of being flagged, but over the past two years I greatly wish I at least had the capability to just look at "tech articles" vs. everything else. Also, I get it, it's easy to say "just don't look", I'm just asking if anyone else things an easy way to filter out some threads like this would be useful. This sentiment is basically a follow-on to a submission I posted recently, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29532676 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29532676 , where the best consensus seemed to be that it's really not possible to have insightful, thoughtful debate on these sensitive topics, or at least it's the case that the HN threads really aren't that much higher quality on these topics than on other sites, and that's not true for lots of other categories of topics.

DenisM 5y ago
I takes less than two minutes to scan the front page to weed out Covid news. How is this a problem?
mlac 5y ago
You could set up Inoreader with a filter on it for COVID.

aitchnyu 5y ago

Does booster have same contents as dose 1 or can it use a fraction of the material? I heard about research of mixing vaccines by different manufacturers but not about stretching a dose to more individuals.

iamdamian 5y ago

I'm vaccinated but do not plan to get a booster of the original vaccine. If a new and dangerous variant shows up, and we have a vaccine specifically for that variant, I will consider that new shot, just as I do with yearly flu shots. What many people miss when they advocate for boosters is that antibody count is not the full story. When it comes to protection against severe disease, cell-mediated immunity is key and doesn't go away. Here's the most relevant science I've found about the effectiveness of the booster. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115926 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2115926 If you look at the results table, the booster does benefit everyone. I can't argue with that. However, the absolute counts shown in that table paint a more nuanced picture. While the 60+ crowd gets significant benefits from being boosted, making it a no-brainer for them, the under 60 crowd has less benefit. The under 60 crowd is already relatively safe from severe disease and death with the original vaccine dose. Being healthy and under 60, I need to weigh these mild benefits with the cons: 1) normalizing mandated boosters as an ongoing way of life and 2) extending the pandemic by using up booster doses instead of sending them to undervaccinated countries (the ones where new variants are popping up). Instead of getting in the habit of being boosted with the same vaccine every 3-6 months for mild benefit, I think it makes much more sense to take a holistic view that helps us end this pandemic. [Edited for clarity]

disgruntledphd2 5y ago
> While the booster does have significant benefits for the 60+ crowd, the benefits are not nearly as great for other age groups. For me, the cons of getting boosted outweigh the pros, and so I won't. Hmmm, interesting. I read that paper and thought, wow, I'm glad I got a booster ;). > What many people miss when they advocate for boosters is that antibody count is not the full story when it comes to protection against severe disease. Cell-mediated immunity is key and doesn't go away. This appears to be very true (although I am not an immunologist). > Instead of boosting our antibody counts ever 3-6 months with the same vaccine and normalizing mandated boosters, I think it makes much more sense to send these to undervaccinated locations where variants are evolving. Sending the boosters to the rest of the world makes far more sense than boosting the general populations in the developed world. We should definitely do both, but if we can only do one then it should be vaccinating as much of the world as possible.

treme 5y ago

Risk of myocarditis following sequential COVID-19 vaccinations by age and sex https://www.reveddit.com/v/COVID19/comments/rofrig/risk_of_myocarditis_following_sequential_covid19/?ps_after=1640482645 https://www.reveddit.com/v/COVID19/comments/rofrig/risk_of_m... Really interesting paper from authors with major roles on advisory committees and public health. This is an important and comprehensive dataset that will absolutely be used to further inform public policy in the UK and abroad. The main take home: "the risk following COVID-19 vaccination was largely restricted to younger males aged less than 40 years, where the risks of myocarditis following vaccination and infection were similar. However, the notable exception was that in younger males receiving a second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine, the risk of myocarditis was higher following vaccination than infection, with an additional 101 events estimated following a second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine compared to 7 events following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. i.e The second dose of "full strength" Moderna in males 13-40 gives a spike in myocarditis that is markedly higher than the risk of myocarditis from covid infection. There weren't enough cases of myocarditis from this very comprehensive dataset to properly assess myocarditis in children aged 13-17, so as the authors state, this now needs to be pursued by pooling international datasets, and I expect they are already pursuing that. Very interesting data, thanks for posting. As I stated elsewhere, this is one piece of the public health puzzle. There are obviously a number of risks and benefits that all feed into the recommendations made. But all else being equal, this data could certainly affect recommendations for Moderna vs other vaccine options in males under 40. Watching with interest, thanks for posting OP! permalinkhide replies (2)author-focusas-ofpreserve [–]a_teletubby113 points4 days, 20 hours ago* (edited 3 hours, 2 minutes after) It's not just a Moderna problem though. Even for Pfizer, we see a weaker but clear signal: Infection: 2.02 (1.13 - 3.61) Dose 1: 1.66 (1.14 - 3.41) Dose 2: 3.41 (2.44 - 4.78) Dose 3: 7.60 (1.92 - 30.15) This is a "bombshell" for the lack of better words. I really wish someone could show this to college administrators who are mandating 3d dose for college students after just 6 months, with no regard for recent breakthrough infections. Edit: I know the CIs overlap, but the fact that the point estimate of infection (2.02) is clearly outside of Dose 2's CI (2.44 - 4.78) is already concerning. I'm merely advocating for caution for healthy young males for whom Covid is a miniscule threat.

bern4444 5y ago

I truly don't understand what is so difficult about getting the booster shot. Outside of that, a private institution is absolutely allowed to make a rule like this. If you don't want to get a booster shot that's fine - the government should not force you to do so, but that action has consequences. Private - and several public - institutions should impose vaccine requirements as they deem fit. I want to be able to go see a play, or a movie, or to a restaurant without fear that I'm putting myself more at risk because someone at the table next to me got a vaccine 8 months ago and is no longer protected and far more likely to be carrying and spreading covid. I want to be able to see friends and then my family without having to wait days at a time in between to get a covid test result back because places are allowing not fully vaccinated people in. My personal belief is that fully vaccinated should, today, equate to the initial vaccine plus the booster. I expect it might even further change to include a second booster. I have a difficult time understanding why compliance with a life saving decision that is in the best interest of the individual as well as society is so hard. Reasonable exceptions should continue to exist. If you choose not to get a booster then I don't want you to be able to continuously put me at risk. I fully support mandates by private and public entities. This does not mean I will always do so - I'm not playing the slippery slope argument fallacy game. For covid booster shots I would be in full support of a government mandate.

iamdamian 5y ago
> I want to be able to go see a play, or a movie, or to a restaurant without fear that I'm putting myself more at risk because someone at the table next to me got a vaccine 8 months ago Why do you believe that you're any more at risk in this situation if you're boosted? > ... and is no longer protected and far more likely to be carrying and spreading covid Antibody levels are not the full story. Cell-based immunity remains intact without boosters and is key to preventing hospitalization/death.
- bern4444 5y ago
  > Why do you believe that you're any more at risk in this situation if you're boosted? Covid spreads far more easily indoors. Breakthrough cases are becoming more common. Group immunity through boosters (or exposure) is more effective at preventing the spread of covid and reduces the chance that any one individual will catch COVID (and continue to spread it). > Cell-based immunity remains intact without boosters and is key to preventing hospitalization/death. Source? And further, preventing hospitalization and death is great - but we should aim to do better, preventing sickness, stopping the spread, reducing the chance of mutation etc which is what the vaccines (initial and boosters) enable. ETA: in another of your comments you cited an article with this conclusion: "Across the age groups studied, rates of confirmed Covid-19 and severe illness were substantially lower among participants who received a booster dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine than among those who did not." and still somehow came to the conclusion that not getting boosted is better for society.

faangiq 5y ago

Race to the bottom. Faster!

dennis_jeeves 5y ago

heybecker 5y ago

Y'all are overthinking this. The answer is "Do Not Identify". Your vax status is between you and your doctor.

slenk 5y ago

I don't understand how this is any different than the normal vaccines that are required for you to attend public and private universities. This isn't a new concept.

PaulHoule 5y ago

I know Cornell requires me (staff) to get a booster by February. I was looking for one in early December and couldn't get one in Ithaca in the near future so I wound up booking a shot three weeks later (this week) in Cortland, the next town over. It was surreal being right next to a student outbreak with 1000+ positives but having almost no transmission to faculty and staff.

nostrebored 5y ago
[flagged]
jdavis703 5y ago
Aren’t faculty and staff generally already socially distanced from students — even before the pandemic? It’s not like pre-K.
CydeWeys 5y ago
Sounds like the students are partying outside of school hours and the professors aren't. Also dorm/shared living can't be helping either.
- johnchristopher 5y ago
  Aren't they partying together all day in a classroom anyway ?
  - PaulHoule 5y ago
    The administration claimed that there was no evidence of transmission in classroom situations and I'm certain that what true up until the surge at the very end. I work in a unit that runs a web site and we were all sent home early in the pandemic. Students came back the academic year after that but I think we had only two staffers from my unit who were authorized to come back to the office that year. In that time frame Cornell kept in-person instruction running, they were testing all students twice a week. My unit returned to the office last summer, they restarted instruction with most students being tested on a once weekly schedule. There was a panic early in the semester with the delta variant being brought in by incoming students so we had strict mask requirements both indoors and dense outdoor situations. Throughout most of the fall 2021 semester both Cornell and Tompkins County were testing about 5000 people a day, Tompkins was getting about 50 positives a day, Cornell more like 5. At the end of the semester we had the Omicron outbreak that was featured on CNN. Myself I have very little contact with undergraduates at all, my unit has only a handful of interns, once in a while I talk to undergraduates waiting in line for food or at the library or something. I've tried to sort out the social hierarchy of frats and sororities by how expensive the cars are in the parking lots are but other than that I know nothing at all about their partying habits. My son and I almost went to that anime convention at the Javits Center which had an Omicron outbreak but couldn't get tickets for Saturday so we settled for going to the comic-con in Scranton (in an equally overdense environment that seems outright cruel to the socially awkward attendees, some of whom we saw cowering under tables.) Looking back we're glad we didn't go because I bet attendees of that convention spread the virus all over the Northeast.

danappelxx 5y ago

All the universities in the UC system are also requiring booster shots by end of January.

Proven 5y ago

And then another one by end of September... I wonder if we'll get to the point where they require a booster shot every month or every week and how many people would still comply at that point.

mistrial9 5y ago

compliance !== safety

verdverm 5y ago
I think you're being down voted for using JS syntax. You should really only need != I think your statement applies equally well to many other things. Computer Security popped into my head when I read it.

vaccin8 5y ago

There’s a lot of extremism on both sides. I’m vaccinated, boosted etc. and very much pro-vaccine, however, I try to avoid extremism and I also like to understand the non-extremist opposition to my view. As such, I’ve been trying to find the non-extremist[1] anti-vaccine argument… but I’ve struggled. I guess this is as good a place as any: anyone here want to share their own anti-vax thoughts, or the thoughts of someone anti-vax that they respect? [1] I define extremist as the satanism / 5g microchip stuff.

lowkey_ 5y ago
Preliminary note: I don't claim to be an expert in any field relevant to vaccines. This is just an everyday layman's opinion. (Also, I'm vaccinated and boosted as well). I think "anti-vax" sounds inherently extremist and conspiracy-theorist, and isn't an accurate representation of the middle ground here. To be fair, it's more like "pro-choice." Plenty of vaccines are given to children every year and required for them to attend school, and there hasn't really been any negative side-effects of that policy. It's tough to argue that we should not be required to have any vaccine to attend school, and that would break the status quo in the other direction. The question then becomes: What could make the Covid vaccine different from other vaccines, such that it shouldn't be required? * If these vaccines were approved earlier and with more early-stage preliminary data than other vaccines? * If Covid is not as severe as the diseases we currently require a vaccine for? [1] [1] The current required vaccines for school in New York, for example, are Diphtheria, Hepatitis B, Measles, Polio, and Chickenpox. The mortality rate and permanent damage for some of these diseases are much higher than Covid. With others, I'm not sure of the pre-vaccine mortality rate as it's been around for a long time. With all that in mind, Covid spreads as much if not more as the diseases we saw fit to require vaccinations against, and the mortality rate for the older population is high. I think a fair argument is whether schoolchildren should have to be vaccinated to protect against infecting the more vulnerable population.
- md_ 5y ago
  This is an excellent analysis, and I wish we saw more of these comparisons. The status quo (which differs by country!) for compulsory or somewhat-compulsory vaccination provides a great benchmark for what's seemingly "reasonable." I think that benchmark--and your analysis seems to show similarly--suggests most developed countries are sorta fine with compulsory vaccines for diseases like Covid. But looking at things through this lens helps contextualize and normalize the current policies--people who are concerned about Covid vaccines might feel a lot better when the vaccine is put into perspective.

stri8ed 5y ago

Given the relative weakness of the (current) vaccines vs Omnicron, do these mandates make any sense, or is it largely security theatre at this point?

adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
there is pretty good evidence that a booster provides relatively strong protection at least in the short term
tmp_anon_22 5y ago
I believe there is data that fully vaccinated individuals on average have less severe symptoms and significantly fewer hospitalizations. Feel free to refute (I don't have time at the moment to look it up) but I feel confident saying that.
mentos 5y ago
[flagged]
jimbob45 5y ago
Put yourself in the shoes of the school leadership. They need to weigh the negative publicity from this mandate against the potential negative publicity of an unvaccinated outbreak at their school (or god forbid, death(s)). It's really a no-brainer without even plugging the numbers in.
- aantix 5y ago
  If the motivation is to avoid bad publicity, isn't that security theater?
rurp 5y ago
There's a lot of room between 95% effective and useless. From everything I've read the vaccines are still a significant help, especially for preventing severe cases, even if they are less effective than against previous waves.
- 5y ago

HarryHirsch 5y ago

You'd wish there were adapted vaccines and especially nasal vaccines, but that's not even on the government's radar. Where's the revolution?

stri8ed 5y ago
There are some oral vaccines in development - https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/israels-oramed-gets-vietnam-pre-order-10-mln-covid-19-vaccine-doses-2021-12-29/ https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  Nasal, too. https://news.yale.edu/2021/12/10/nasal-vaccine-may-aid-fight-against-new-viral-variants https://news.yale.edu/2021/12/10/nasal-vaccine-may-aid-fight...
  - HarryHirsch 5y ago
    I know. It's the lack of discussion in the media that's worrying.
    - xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
      I've seen tons of media coverage about oral and nasal vaccines, what are you talking about?
adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
yes it is, pfizer and moderna are already testing omicron specific vaccines.