Texas vaccine death data

10,924 Views | 140 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by aTm2004
Post removed:
by user
03_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/10/covid-19-reinfections-are-real-and-serious-all-the-more-reason-to-be-vaccinated/amp/

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.


Were antibody tests done for each athlete that produced a positive test? What was the timing of their antibody tests after a "reinfection?"
planoaggie123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/10/covid-19-reinfections-are-real-and-serious-all-the-more-reason-to-be-vaccinated/amp/

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.


...but people with the vaccine do...???

We are about to send people to get boosters and we don't even know if they all need it...some need it...none need it....just boosting to boost honestly.

I guess if your plan is just to do 4 - 6 month blind boosters then fine but let's not pretend, outside of the ideal hybrid immunity, that one is soo much better than the other (natural vs vaccine).

PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
In the interest of useful data, and not manipulated data to back up a talking point.

I do wonder if they are tracking whether people had anti-bodies upon death, in addition to tracking vaccinated vs not vaccinated.
The more data points they track, the more accurate any analysis would be. The agenda shouldn't be to just push vaccines on everyone just because we bought a **** ton of them. Any policy should be continuously evaluated and updated as more data comes in.

I also wonder if they are having people, that were confirmed as having covid, come back in periodically to check antibody levels (or whatever the actual terminology is). From what I can tell, they still don't know how long you can expect to be protected from reinfection, or reduced severity if they do get it again.
Guitarsoup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/10/covid-19-reinfections-are-real-and-serious-all-the-more-reason-to-be-vaccinated/amp/

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.


Were antibody tests done for each athlete that produced a positive test? What was the timing of their antibody tests after a "reinfection?"


Antibody tests done with confirmed reinfection. Since the NBA tests quite regularly, I assume they caught infections pretty quickly
Guitarsoup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
planoaggie123 said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/10/covid-19-reinfections-are-real-and-serious-all-the-more-reason-to-be-vaccinated/amp/

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.


...but people with the vaccine do...???

We are about to send people to get boosters and we don't even know if they all need it...some need it...none need it....just boosting to boost honestly.

I guess if your plan is just to do 4 - 6 month blind boosters then fine but let's not pretend, outside of the ideal hybrid immunity, that one is soo much better than the other (natural vs vaccine).




Without knowing a particular person's immune system and running a number of tests, it is impossible to say which is better.

There are a lot more tests being run than just "boosting to boost" which is why the FDA didn't approve the booster for most people this month.
planoaggie123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What about the larger Israel studies?

Did any of the reinfections die? What about the one with zero antibody...surely he died...right? Could there be untraced T-Cell response?

As for the one with "trace" antibodies...do we scientifically know what level one needs? Maybe he got lucky and did not die???
planoaggie123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
CDC and Fauci don't care to wait on the tests....
03_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Guitarsoup said:

03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/10/covid-19-reinfections-are-real-and-serious-all-the-more-reason-to-be-vaccinated/amp/

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.


Were antibody tests done for each athlete that produced a positive test? What was the timing of their antibody tests after a "reinfection?"


Antibody tests done with confirmed reinfection. Since the NBA tests quite regularly, I assume they caught infections pretty quickly


But do they do antibody tests for each confirmed positive test? Or just those that were deemed reinfections?
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.
Obviously anecdotal, but my fully vaccinated otherwise healthy mid-50's aunt spent a week in the hospital with COVID pneumonia while her 66 year old unvaccinated brother (my dad) was sick but never got close to needing to go to the hospital.

Quote:

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.
Some of us do:
https://texags.com/forums/84/topics/3208844/replies/60192986

Also, how many of those reinfections were actual first infections due to a false positive the first time? You can't honestly sit there and say out of the constant testing the NBA, NFL, and NCAA did that there weren't false positives.
chjoak
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
CDub06 said:

chjoak said:

Honestly, I don't believe those numbers. I have read claims on this board of people currently working in TX hospital systems that said...

1. Their was no place in their electronic system to track vax vs no-vax and across the hospital system there was no consistent way that anyone was tracking that data so it was impossible for this person's employer to accurately report said info to any agency.

2. The deaths of vaxxed patients were being coded as non-Covid related deaths (heart attach, pneumonia, stroke, etc...) while deaths of non-vaxxed were being coded as Covid.

This is crazy facebook conspiracy talk. There's no motivation for the coders to do this. There's no upside to this. This is the epitome of unfounded, made up conspiracy talk. Just complete misinformation.
You may be right, but that was posted on Texags by someone that claimed it to be happening at the hospital they worked. I'll try to dig it up but that was several weeks ago and I'm not 100% sure what thread it was on.
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PatAg said:

In the interest of useful data, and not manipulated data to back up a talking point.

I do wonder if they are tracking whether people had anti-bodies upon death, in addition to tracking vaccinated vs not vaccinated.
The more data points they track, the more accurate any analysis would be. The agenda shouldn't be to just push vaccines on everyone just because we bought a **** ton of them. Any policy should be continuously evaluated and updated as more data comes in.

I also wonder if they are having people, that were confirmed as having covid, come back in periodically to check antibody levels (or whatever the actual terminology is). From what I can tell, they still don't know how long you can expect to be protected from reinfection, or reduced severity if they do get it again.
UT Health is doing a study (Texas Cares) where they seem to be doing exactly this. Those who have had COVID or just got the vaccine could sign up and they will have their blood drawn, then another time at 3 months, and a third time at 6 months, and antibodies would be identified and tracked. There's a thread on this board where a lot of us signed up before they stopped taking participants.
Gordo14
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another thread wherr nobody said "natural immunity doesn't exist" and actually hsd nothing to do with natural immunity successfully derailed by the real victims here.

Got a little bit of everything in here too. Conspiracy theories, rants about Faucci, completely misunderstanding and misinterpreting (sometimes almost deliberately so) hard data. Great job everybody. Can't wait to redo it on another thread that literally says nothing about natural immunity again.
planoaggie123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
adding they accepted anyone....not just vaccinated or covid...which i think tracking people with neither is important...and you can see how, if at all, their antibodies changed should they have ended up getting COVID, getting the vaccine or not at all.


Hopefully we get some really good data from the study....
agsalaska
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
chjoak said:

CDub06 said:

chjoak said:

Honestly, I don't believe those numbers. I have read claims on this board of people currently working in TX hospital systems that said...

1. Their was no place in their electronic system to track vax vs no-vax and across the hospital system there was no consistent way that anyone was tracking that data so it was impossible for this person's employer to accurately report said info to any agency.

2. The deaths of vaxxed patients were being coded as non-Covid related deaths (heart attach, pneumonia, stroke, etc...) while deaths of non-vaxxed were being coded as Covid.

This is crazy facebook conspiracy talk. There's no motivation for the coders to do this. There's no upside to this. This is the epitome of unfounded, made up conspiracy talk. Just complete misinformation.
You may be right, but that was posted on Texags by someone that claimed it to be happening at the hospital they worked. I'll try to dig it up but that was several weeks ago and I'm not 100% sure what thread it was on.
Just curious, why do you give one random post so much weight against the dozens of doctors and nurses that post here every day saying the exact opposite?

My suggestion to anyone who does not believe that the unvaccinated are the ones dying is to go have a personal face to face conversation with a couple of ER nurses or doctors. I know exactly what they are going to say to you. When they are done if you still do not believe them that's fine.

Gordo14
How long do you want to ignore this user?
03_Aggie said:

PJYoung said:

Tiny point of order, trials started in March of 2020 so we have over 18 months of data now, not to mention this vaccine technology has been around since like 2005, not to mention long term effects from a vaccine aren't really a thing, not to mention literally billions of people have gotten the shot by now.

Meanwhile 99% of the dead in the USA are unvaccinated. 680k or whatever it is now, more than the 1918 Spanish Flu.

Now back to the DEBATE.

Edit: and I don't see many people telling covid survivors on here that they should be forced to get the vaccine. I personally would encourage you to keep tabs on your antibody levels every few months if you don't want to get the shot.


Tiny point of order. Covid has been around longer than the vaccine yet people still use "unknown long term effects" as a scare tactic. Not to mention that mRNA vaccines are not like previous vaccines so a lack of long term effects of traditional vaccines don't really apply to mRNA vaccines as they are the first of their kind. Meanwhile the data still supports older people or those with comorbidity still lead the charge in deaths. Even those that have received the vaccine.


People develop cancer decades after catching HPV. People can get Shingles decades after getting thr Chickenpox. AIDS often happens years or decades after getting HIV. Herpes is a friend for life. There are plenty of viruses that have long term consequnces that are not readily apparent even a short time after infection. That's not a scare tactic, that's a fact. Now does COVID cause long term effects generally - probably not. But we don't know. It is far from impossible that it could; there are many examples of unrelated viruses doing just that.

The mechanism of a vaccine does not allow things like this to happen. You don't have dormant virus inside of you for decades. You don't have live virus damaging your cells and replicating a couple hundred billion times. All you do is invoke an immune response and then everything is gone. It's fundamentally different because the self-replication component doesn't exist in the vaccine.
Guitarsoup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/10/covid-19-reinfections-are-real-and-serious-all-the-more-reason-to-be-vaccinated/amp/

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.


Were antibody tests done for each athlete that produced a positive test? What was the timing of their antibody tests after a "reinfection?"


Antibody tests done with confirmed reinfection. Since the NBA tests quite regularly, I assume they caught infections pretty quickly


But do they do antibody tests for each confirmed positive test? Or just those that were deemed reinfections?


I don't know that they tested everyone, but I don't know that they didn't test everyone. I would doubt that they did, since the immune systems of the world's most elite athletes don't necessarily correlate to the average human. I've seen no data of the antibody level of the people that didn't get reinfected.

A couple of the reinfected people had very high levels.
Aston94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
planoaggie123 said:

Aston94 said:

planoaggie123 said:

Aston94 said:

aTm2004 said:

Come on. On this board vaccine = good, natural antibodies = ANTIVAXXER!!!!


That is just not true. You do appreciate that tracking those with natural immunity is much more difficult, right?

Knowing whether you have natural immunity from day to day is a tricky thing, and what your immunity levels are is difficult to determine as well. I don't think anyone thinks natural immunity isn't a thing, but it comes with lots of questions too.

The vaccine works.

Is this the new headline? Vaccine > Natural.

Give me a break.

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/vaccine/israeli-study-did-find-natural-immunity-is-effective-in-fighting-covid-19-health-experts-recommend-vaccination/536-ff80f3d4-bb78-4eb3-8889-7eed73d4d9b6


A team of researchers from Israel studied 2.5 million charts of patients from one of Israel's largest health systems, Maccabi Healthcare Services. But it is important to note that the study has not yet been peer reviewed and should not be used to guide clinical practice.

The study found fully vaccinated individuals were at greater risk for COVID-19-related hospitalizations compared to those who were unvaccinated and previously infected. The study also found that people who received at least one dose of the Pfizer vaccine and had been previously infected were half as likely to be reinfected.


Where exactly did I say vaccine was better than natural immunity? I just said natural immunity is difficult to trace and can be hard to quantify. I didn't say it wasn't good, I am not here to argue either way on natural immunity, the point is the vaccine works.




Lol are you serious. You had a paragraph qualifying the potential day to day benefit of natural immunity and then a blanket unqualified statement about the vaccine saying it works (booster shot anyone???)

Here is your statement:

Knowing whether you have natural immunity from day to day is a tricky thing, and what your immunity levels are is difficult to determine as well. I don't think anyone thinks natural immunity isn't a thing, but it comes with lots of questions too.

The vaccine works.

I think the point of this thread was the study showing how effective the vaccine is. Do you dispute that it works?

I am sure natural immunity works too, I have never said otherwise. I have my fears about people "thinking they had Covid" and not getting vaccinated only to find out they did not have Covid and are now struggling for their life because they did not have natural immunity and did not get vaccinated.

IF everyone did regular antibody screening to establish that they had sufficient antibodies to protect them from Covid, then we could be more assured of natural immunity, and I would be all on board. I am not disputing that natural immunity works, what I am disputing is how we know whether someone has immunity or not. That is the difficult part.

A vaccine in a lab can be evaluated on a constant over time and against each variant. And then we can say "those that had the pfizer vaccine 8 months ago and later need a booster because it has been shown to only be ___% effective against variant ____". Natural immunity varies significantly from person to person so having a blanket "If you had covid ___ months agos or longer you will not be immune to variant ____" is not going to happen.

Public health wise the vaccine makes a lot of sense, natural immunity is definitely a good thing, and I believe it works too, but saying that someone had a minor case in March 2020 and is still immune to every variant I think is doing a disservice to that person, because we don't know.



Guitarsoup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTm2004 said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.
Obviously anecdotal, but my fully vaccinated otherwise healthy mid-50's aunt spent a week in the hospital with COVID pneumonia while her 66 year old unvaccinated brother (my dad) was sick but never got close to needing to go to the hospital.

Quote:

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.
Some of us do:
https://texags.com/forums/84/topics/3208844/replies/60192986

Also, how many of those reinfections were actual first infections due to a false positive the first time? You can't honestly sit there and say out of the constant testing the NBA, NFL, and NCAA did that there weren't false positives.


Because they're doing lab tests and not rapid tests and also doing multiple tests I don't think they have false positives. They aren't doing one rapid test and telling the player he can't play for 2 weeks and sending them on their way.

From friends in both leagues I do believe there are a lot of false negatives though. I'm fairly certain that a lot of star asymptomatic players are not getting a thorough swab
Fitch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ChemAg15 said:

Fitch said:

ChemAg15 said:

Fair point. 18 months of data it is. My point remains, no way of knowing long term health effects. If there are any negative long term effects from the mRNA technology, I don't think we'd see them for several years.

Yea reasonable people don't think covid survivors need to be vaxxed. But a lot of those same people are fine with those unvaxxed becoming second class citizens who are getting fired from their jobs and having more and more restrictions placed on them.

The vaccine keeps you out of the hospital if you don't know how covid will hit you. The constant messaging that vax good unvax bad does not align with reality and it's pushing people that probably should get the vax away.
Based on what?
Does anyone get complications after 3 years? After 5? How could we know since no one had had this in their system that long? It's new tech. Based on the fact that if someone were to have long term effects from the vaccine, we won't know until enough time has passed to realize there are long term effects.
Not being a jerk, but none of that answers the question what would make you think that after effects would present years down the road.

Saying "we just don't know" is more hand-wringing than a reason why biology would start working differently, or how the mode of action of these vaccines might generate after effects separated by years from the initial (causal) shot.
planoaggie123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This will be my last post on this specific run of responses....

I do think vaccines work. I am glad my parents are vaccinated and I am glad we have something available for anyone that chooses / needs. I hope hospital levels drop and our doctors / nurses can take a break.

I just don't think you can try and discuss natural immunity as weakening while not giving equal time and concern for vaccine immunity weakening (hence the need for boosters). I felt you claimed 100% vaccine efficacy while severely questioning natural...this feeling was the fact that you wrote 4 lines questioning natural immunity and then blanketly stating "vaccines work" with no qualifications.
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agsalaska said:

chjoak said:

CDub06 said:

chjoak said:

Honestly, I don't believe those numbers. I have read claims on this board of people currently working in TX hospital systems that said...

1. Their was no place in their electronic system to track vax vs no-vax and across the hospital system there was no consistent way that anyone was tracking that data so it was impossible for this person's employer to accurately report said info to any agency.

2. The deaths of vaxxed patients were being coded as non-Covid related deaths (heart attach, pneumonia, stroke, etc...) while deaths of non-vaxxed were being coded as Covid.

This is crazy facebook conspiracy talk. There's no motivation for the coders to do this. There's no upside to this. This is the epitome of unfounded, made up conspiracy talk. Just complete misinformation.
You may be right, but that was posted on Texags by someone that claimed it to be happening at the hospital they worked. I'll try to dig it up but that was several weeks ago and I'm not 100% sure what thread it was on.
Just curious, why do you give one random post so much weight against the dozens of doctors and nurses that post here every day saying the exact opposite?

My suggestion to anyone who does not believe that the unvaccinated are the ones dying is to go have a personal face to face conversation with a couple of ER nurses or doctors. I know exactly what they are going to say to you. When they are done if you still do not believe them that's fine.


I dunno...maybe because there was a doc on here stating there were no ICU beds available anywhere in Texas, and when confronted with data and comments from hospital leaders and city/county elected officials debunking his claim, the admitted he only called a handful of hospitals. Let's not forget, the same "regulars" on this board tried to defend him and debunk the hospital leaders and city/county officials.

My SIL is a PA in the ED, and she's unvaccinated. She'll tell you COVID can be bad for some, but most will handle it just fine.
WES2006AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Gordo14 said:

Another thread wherr nobody said "natural immunity doesn't exist" and actually hsd nothing to do with natural immunity successfully derailed by the real victims here.

Got a little bit of everything in here too. Conspiracy theories, rants about Faucci, completely misunderstanding and misinterpreting (sometimes almost deliberately so) hard data. Great job everybody. Can't wait to redo it on another thread that literally says nothing about natural immunity again.
Well said. The same 5 posters seem to show up on every thread about vaccines to talk about their natural immunity and show off some new found victimhood for being "forced" to make a choice about getting the vaccine.
Aston94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
planoaggie123 said:

This will be my last post on this specific run of responses....

I do think vaccines work. I am glad my parents are vaccinated and I am glad we have something available for anyone that chooses / needs. I hope hospital levels drop and our doctors / nurses can take a break.

I just don't think you can try and discuss natural immunity as weakening while not giving equal time and concern for vaccine immunity weakening (hence the need for boosters). I felt you claimed 100% vaccine efficacy while severely questioning natural...this feeling was the fact that you wrote 4 lines questioning natural immunity and then blanketly stating "vaccines work" with no qualifications.

Vaccines weaken for sure, but they are easily researched against each new strain to see their effectiveness over time, and if they need a booster then it can be recommended universally at one time. Tracing wise it is just much easier.

Natural immunity works, but there has to be an understanding that it will vary tremendously from person to person and that there are risks with people thinking they are immune.

Neither is perfect, but the ability to research and provide good science for people to rely on is much easier in a vaccine than with the variables offered by natural immunity.
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Guitarsoup said:

aTm2004 said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.
Obviously anecdotal, but my fully vaccinated otherwise healthy mid-50's aunt spent a week in the hospital with COVID pneumonia while her 66 year old unvaccinated brother (my dad) was sick but never got close to needing to go to the hospital.

Quote:

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.
Some of us do:
https://texags.com/forums/84/topics/3208844/replies/60192986

Also, how many of those reinfections were actual first infections due to a false positive the first time? You can't honestly sit there and say out of the constant testing the NBA, NFL, and NCAA did that there weren't false positives.


Because they're doing lab tests and not rapid tests and also doing multiple tests I don't think they have false positives. They aren't doing one rapid test and telling the player he can't play for 2 weeks and sending them on their way.

From friends in both leagues I do believe there are a lot of false negatives though. I'm fairly certain that a lot of star asymptomatic players are not getting a thorough swab
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/multiple-nba-players-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19-twice/ar-BB1cGZTL

Quote:

[url=https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u-s-supreme-court-to-hear-boston-christian-flag-dispute/ar-AAP0hUp][/url]ESPN's Brian Windhorst and Zach Lowe reported on Tuesday that multiple NBA players who previously tested positive for the coronavirus have recently tested positive again. Windhorst and Lowe added this isn't surprising, as the CDC has expected reinfections since the start of the pandemic.

It's unknown how many supposed asymptomatic players who tested positive for the virus earlier in the year produced so-called "false positives." Multiple leagues and competitions, including the NBA, have confirmed "false positive" cases since the spring and summer months. The CDC hasn't determined how long somebody who battles COVID-19 is immune from becoming infected a second time.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/01/13/warriors-eric-paschall-clears-nba-health-and-safety-protocols-after-false-positive-test/
Quote:

Eric Paschall has rejoined the Warriors after a COVID-19 test falsely indicated he was infected with the novel coronavirus.
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
planoaggie123 said:

This will be my last post on this specific run of responses....

I do think vaccines work. I am glad my parents are vaccinated and I am glad we have something available for anyone that chooses / needs. I hope hospital levels drop and our doctors / nurses can take a break.

I just don't think you can try and discuss natural immunity as weakening while not giving equal time and concern for vaccine immunity weakening (hence the need for boosters). I felt you claimed 100% vaccine efficacy while severely questioning natural...this feeling was the fact that you wrote 4 lines questioning natural immunity and then blanketly stating "vaccines work" with no qualifications.

aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
WES2006AG said:

Gordo14 said:

Another thread wherr nobody said "natural immunity doesn't exist" and actually hsd nothing to do with natural immunity successfully derailed by the real victims here.

Got a little bit of everything in here too. Conspiracy theories, rants about Faucci, completely misunderstanding and misinterpreting (sometimes almost deliberately so) hard data. Great job everybody. Can't wait to redo it on another thread that literally says nothing about natural immunity again.
Well said. The same 5 posters seem to show up on every thread about vaccines to talk about their natural immunity and show off some new found victimhood for being "forced" to make a choice about getting the vaccine. The same dozen posters seem to show up on every thread to talk about how safe and effective the vaccines are and how everyone should get one, and if they choose not to, how they are risking death or the possibility of becoming a "COVID longhauler."
fify
Guitarsoup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTm2004 said:

Guitarsoup said:

aTm2004 said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.
Obviously anecdotal, but my fully vaccinated otherwise healthy mid-50's aunt spent a week in the hospital with COVID pneumonia while her 66 year old unvaccinated brother (my dad) was sick but never got close to needing to go to the hospital.

Quote:

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.
Some of us do:
https://texags.com/forums/84/topics/3208844/replies/60192986

Also, how many of those reinfections were actual first infections due to a false positive the first time? You can't honestly sit there and say out of the constant testing the NBA, NFL, and NCAA did that there weren't false positives.


Because they're doing lab tests and not rapid tests and also doing multiple tests I don't think they have false positives. They aren't doing one rapid test and telling the player he can't play for 2 weeks and sending them on their way.

From friends in both leagues I do believe there are a lot of false negatives though. I'm fairly certain that a lot of star asymptomatic players are not getting a thorough swab
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/multiple-nba-players-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19-twice/ar-BB1cGZTL

Quote:

[url=https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u-s-supreme-court-to-hear-boston-christian-flag-dispute/ar-AAP0hUp][/url]ESPN's Brian Windhorst and Zach Lowe reported on Tuesday that multiple NBA players who previously tested positive for the coronavirus have recently tested positive again. Windhorst and Lowe added this isn't surprising, as the CDC has expected reinfections since the start of the pandemic.

It's unknown how many supposed asymptomatic players who tested positive for the virus earlier in the year produced so-called "false positives." Multiple leagues and competitions, including the NBA, have confirmed "false positive" cases since the spring and summer months. The CDC hasn't determined how long somebody who battles COVID-19 is immune from becoming infected a second time.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/01/13/warriors-eric-paschall-clears-nba-health-and-safety-protocols-after-false-positive-test/
Quote:

Eric Paschall has rejoined the Warriors after a COVID-19 test falsely indicated he was infected with the novel coronavirus.



Right. They retest all positives to confirm they are not false positive.
planoaggie123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Guitarsoup said:

aTm2004 said:

Guitarsoup said:

aTm2004 said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.
Obviously anecdotal, but my fully vaccinated otherwise healthy mid-50's aunt spent a week in the hospital with COVID pneumonia while her 66 year old unvaccinated brother (my dad) was sick but never got close to needing to go to the hospital.

Quote:

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.
Some of us do:
https://texags.com/forums/84/topics/3208844/replies/60192986

Also, how many of those reinfections were actual first infections due to a false positive the first time? You can't honestly sit there and say out of the constant testing the NBA, NFL, and NCAA did that there weren't false positives.


Because they're doing lab tests and not rapid tests and also doing multiple tests I don't think they have false positives. They aren't doing one rapid test and telling the player he can't play for 2 weeks and sending them on their way.

From friends in both leagues I do believe there are a lot of false negatives though. I'm fairly certain that a lot of star asymptomatic players are not getting a thorough swab
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/multiple-nba-players-have-tested-positive-for-covid-19-twice/ar-BB1cGZTL

Quote:

[url=https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u-s-supreme-court-to-hear-boston-christian-flag-dispute/ar-AAP0hUp][/url]ESPN's Brian Windhorst and Zach Lowe reported on Tuesday that multiple NBA players who previously tested positive for the coronavirus have recently tested positive again. Windhorst and Lowe added this isn't surprising, as the CDC has expected reinfections since the start of the pandemic.

It's unknown how many supposed asymptomatic players who tested positive for the virus earlier in the year produced so-called "false positives." Multiple leagues and competitions, including the NBA, have confirmed "false positive" cases since the spring and summer months. The CDC hasn't determined how long somebody who battles COVID-19 is immune from becoming infected a second time.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/01/13/warriors-eric-paschall-clears-nba-health-and-safety-protocols-after-false-positive-test/
Quote:

Eric Paschall has rejoined the Warriors after a COVID-19 test falsely indicated he was infected with the novel coronavirus.



Right. They retest all positives to confirm they are not false positive.
So, even with the lab tests, they are getting false positives? Got it.
03_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Guitarsoup said:

03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/10/covid-19-reinfections-are-real-and-serious-all-the-more-reason-to-be-vaccinated/amp/

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.


Were antibody tests done for each athlete that produced a positive test? What was the timing of their antibody tests after a "reinfection?"


Antibody tests done with confirmed reinfection. Since the NBA tests quite regularly, I assume they caught infections pretty quickly


But do they do antibody tests for each confirmed positive test? Or just those that were deemed reinfections?


I don't know that they tested everyone, but I don't know that they didn't test everyone. I would doubt that they did, since the immune systems of the world's most elite athletes don't necessarily correlate to the average human. I've seen no data of the antibody level of the people that didn't get reinfected.

A couple of the reinfected people had very high levels.


It's interesting and I think there would have been a lot of value of antibody results for each positive test. Then one would actually be able to track whether they ever existed (might help better understand accuracy/effectiveness of testing process), if they dropped/increased or stayed relatively flat between what they currently deem initial infection and reinfection.

Guitarsoup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

03_Aggie said:

Guitarsoup said:

ChemAg15 said:

Yea it's unlikely. But it's also unknown. It's also unlikely that someone that got a mild case of covid and recovered is at any risk of a second severe case of covid. My original point is that there is no tangible benefit to getting a vaccine if you've already recovered from a mild case of covid.


As has been discussed multiple times, the strongest immunity is a hybrid from natural antibodies as well as from the vaccine.

Reinfection seems to often be worse than the original. This is obviously anecdotal, but a HS friend will be having to make the decision soon on whether to take her husband (mid 40s, active, healthy) off life support. He's been on a vent for 3 weeks and his lungs are getting better and his kidney function is slowing devolving.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/03/10/covid-19-reinfections-are-real-and-serious-all-the-more-reason-to-be-vaccinated/amp/

Further, most people with natural antibodies don't know what their actual antibodies levels are. The nba ran lots of tests and had seven reinfections last year. One reinfection had zero antibodies and another one had just trace antibodies. I'm guessing the average Texager doesn't really have the fitness level of those in the NBA data, but 2/7 reinfections head little to no natural protection. That's something that should be very concerning to anyone that refuses the vaccine and doesn't know their specific antibody levels.


Were antibody tests done for each athlete that produced a positive test? What was the timing of their antibody tests after a "reinfection?"


Antibody tests done with confirmed reinfection. Since the NBA tests quite regularly, I assume they caught infections pretty quickly


But do they do antibody tests for each confirmed positive test? Or just those that were deemed reinfections?


I don't know that they tested everyone, but I don't know that they didn't test everyone. I would doubt that they did, since the immune systems of the world's most elite athletes don't necessarily correlate to the average human. I've seen no data of the antibody level of the people that didn't get reinfected.

A couple of the reinfected people had very high levels.


It's interesting and I think there would have been a lot of value of antibody results for each positive test. Then one would actually be able to track whether they ever existed (might help better understand accuracy/effectiveness of testing process), if they dropped/increased or stayed relatively flat between what they currently deem initial infection and reinfection.




I'm sure there are more things going on. This is a pre-print.

The big usefulness here is that the NBA is able to control the subjects so well. I hope we see more studies come out of their and other league data
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

I dunno...maybe because there was a doc on here stating there were no ICU beds available anywhere in Texas, and when confronted with data and comments from hospital leaders and city/county elected officials debunking his claim, the admitted he only called a handful of hospitals. Let's not forget, the same "regulars" on this board tried to defend him and debunk the hospital leaders and city/county officials.
How about don't lie about me on a board that I follow? We called every ICU in Texas and many in the surrounding states every day for 8 days straight. We only stopped when all our ventilated COVID patients died. I put in over 100 hours trying to keep those people alive during that time and really don't appreciate people lying and making things up about me or what I said
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
agsalaska
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So as usual this thread got WAY off track.

Back to the OP

Two important paragraphs from the article.

Quote:

.......more than 9,000 Texans who have died from COVID-19 in August and September, nearly 40% of them under the age of 60, part of an alarming upswing in reported daily deaths that threatens to overtake last summer's deadly surge in average weekly numbers.
That is not real surprising to me, considering that most of the older folks either have the antibodies or are vaccinated.

Bu, most importantly
Quote:

Of the nearly 19,000 Texas deaths attributed to COVID-19 since early February, 119 were fully vaccinated according to preliminary data from the state health department.
This is the one that is most important. It is the one that all doctor's that I know, talk to, read, listen to, etc. confirm over and over again. It is the one that requires willful ignorance to ignore or dismiss. It is also the one that is driving the push for vaccine mandates. Everyone dying is unvaccinated.

PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ramblin_ag02 said:

Quote:

I dunno...maybe because there was a doc on here stating there were no ICU beds available anywhere in Texas, and when confronted with data and comments from hospital leaders and city/county elected officials debunking his claim, the admitted he only called a handful of hospitals. Let's not forget, the same "regulars" on this board tried to defend him and debunk the hospital leaders and city/county officials.
How about don't lie about me on a board that I follow? We called every ICU in Texas and many in the surrounding states every day for 8 days straight. We only stopped when all our ventilated COVID patients died. I put in over 100 hours trying to keep those people alive during that time and really don't appreciate people lying and making things up about me or what I said
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.