-
Posts
240 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by Dontshootrude
-
-
55 minutes ago, Wally Fairway said:
prior post was just a smartass post that came back to haunt me
but to update - it is almost exactly 1 week since my surgery, I had my catheter removed on Friday and so far everything is working well, still some limited restriction, no heavy lifting and no sex for at least another week.
Moar details, if you really have nothing better to do with your life
It was a great relief to get the cath out, it was much more painful than the first cath; couldn't ever get comfortable and at times it seemed to be pulling. After removal there were several days of bloody piss; and still have a small amount of blood where the cath rubbed (tip of the penis - ouch).
But it is amazing to be able to pee and void my bladder and not have to feel like it is just a slow process.
Not something anyone looks forward to, and I know there can be complications - but I'm feeling so much better it is amazing.
I don't get removal of all restriction until after my followup which is still about 2 weeks away.I've heard the recovery from TURP is not fun. I'm glad you are already getting relief. Were you having trouble sleeping through the night? If so hopefully the procedure will give you relief from that as well.
-
22 hours ago, Anastasis said:
The adenovirus vector vaccines creep me out. Always have. More comfortable myself with the mRNA tech. That said, the benefit/risk argument for the youngest of kids is extremely thin. People should be able to acknowledge this and have some reasonable posturing for educated parents taking different approaches. Chances of anything involving reasonable in this discussion pretty slim though.
FTR, my adolescent daughter is fully vaxxed with PFE. Leaning towards just getting one PFE shot into the younger kids and slow playing the second shot.
I've scheduled my kids (7 and 5 years old) to get their first shot mid december, and then I'm going to wait 10 weeks to get their second shot.
-
1
-
-
-
On 10/14/2021 at 1:27 PM, immortal13 said:
Liver and kidney failure. She had to be careflighted from Tyler to Baylor Medical ICU in Dallas. She recovered but it was very serious and she almost didn't survive the first couple of days. Around 33 years old, very healthy/fit, and no health issues.
I'm very sorry to hear this. I hope she makes a full recovery.
What I've always wondered in these rare circumstances is if the vaccine did this what would have happened if they were infected with the virus? That reaction is more than likely caused by the spike protein or the mRNA which is less immunogenic than the viral RNA. The virus has the spike protein along with 28 other unique viral proteins, some of which we know can cause significant reactions on their own, and the viral RNA is more likely to cause a reaction. It wouldn't surprise me if these small percentage of people are in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
-
5
-
-
FUCKING FUCK FUCK FUCK
-
Another week of watching a team that makes me want to slam my dick in a car door.
-
Mother FUCK!!!
-
These fucking refs need to DIAF
-
That's better.
-
That was a sick move
-
Man an interception would have been nice there.
-
Damn it.
-
POUR IT ON THEM!!!!
-
Throw it away!!!
-
Large study on vaccine efficacy waning out of Qatar published hours ago: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2114114
The bad news: They report only a 20% efficacy against infection 6 months after the second shot, with efficacy against symptomatic infections being slightly higher.
The good news: "Meanwhile, BNT162b2-induced protection against hospitalization and death persisted with hardly any waning for 6 months after the second dose."
-
7 hours ago, midtown said:
Agreed. Is there a single trial on boosters? I'd say the booster is possibly adding to the anti-vax hesitancy where even someone as pro-vax as I am looks at the vaccine now as a constant money maker pushed on a public where scientists and the FDA don't agree about a booster.
There are multiple trials on boosters. Israel already published a massive one. UK has released data and I suspect we won't be that far behind.
By the end of the month we should have safety and efficacy data from mixing different shots as boosters. That's going to be really interesting.
-
8 hours ago, Satoshi said:
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736(21)02183-8
Protection against hospitalization at 6 months still 93% but effectiveness against infection drops to 47% at 6 months.
I'd like to remind everyone the original efficacy against infection cutoff was 50% when the vaccine development and trials started back in spring 2020. I find it really funny that after waning immunity we are still around the initial target efficacy and people are acting like this is some sort of failure.
93% VE against severe illness after six months is amazing by any measure.
-
3
-
3
-
-
That was a grown man run.
-
-
Punch it in here and it is ballgame.
-
9 hours ago, Bevo said:
I don't know anything about the poster, but the article is good.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02046-8/fulltext
Although the benefits of primary COVID-19 vaccination clearly outweigh the risks, there could be risks if boosters are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines,or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines. If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, widespread boosting should be undertaken only if there is clear evidence that it is appropriate.
Current evidence does not, therefore, appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against severe disease remains high. Even if humoral immunity appears to wane, reductions in neutralising antibody titre do not necessarily predict reductions in vaccine efficacy over time, and reductions in vaccine efficacy against mild disease do not necessarily predict reductions in the (typically higher) efficacy against severe disease. This effect could be because protection against severe disease is mediated not only by antibody responses, which might be relatively short lived for some vaccines, but also by memory responses and cell-mediated immunity, which are generally longer lived.The ability of vaccines that present the antigens of earlier phases of the pandemic (rather than variant-specific antigens) to elicit humoral immune responses against currently circulating variants indicates that these variants have not yet evolved to the point at which they are likely to escape the memory immune responses induced by those vaccines. Even without any changes in vaccine efficacy, increasing success in delivering vaccines to large populations will inevitably lead to increasing numbers of breakthrough cases, especially if vaccination leads to behavioural changes in vaccinees.
To date, none of these studies has provided credible evidence of substantially declining protection against severe disease, even when there appear to be declines over time in vaccine efficacy against symptomatic disease.
Conclusion:
If boosters (whether expressing original or variant antigens) are ultimately to be used, there will be a need to identify specific circumstances in which the direct and indirect benefits of doing so are, on balance, clearly beneficial. Additional research could help to define such circumstances. Furthermore, given the robust booster responses reported for some vaccines, adequate booster responses might be achievable at lower doses, potentially with reduced safety concerns. Given the data gaps, any wide deployment of boosters should be accompanied by a plan to gather reliable data about how well they are working and how safe they are. Their effectiveness and safety could, in some populations, be assessed most reliably during deployment via extremely large-scale randomisation,17 preferably of individuals rather than of groups.Thus, any decisions about the need for boosting or timing of boosting should be based on careful analyses of adequately controlled clinical or epidemiological data, or both, indicating a persistent and meaningful reduction in severe disease, with a benefit–risk evaluation that considers the number of severe cases that boosting would be expected to prevent, along with evidence about whether a specific boosting regimen is likely to be safe and effective against currently circulating variants. As more information becomes available, it may first provide evidence that boosting is needed in some subpopulations. However, these high-stakes decisions should be based on peer-reviewed and publicly available data and robust international scientific discussion.The vaccines that are currently available are safe, effective, and save lives. The limited supply of these vaccines will save the most lives if made available to people who are at appreciable risk of serious disease and have not yet received any vaccine. Even if some gain can ultimately be obtained from boosting, it will not outweigh the benefits of providing initial protection to the unvaccinated. If vaccines are deployed where they would do the most good, they could hasten the end of the pandemic by inhibiting further evolution of variants. Indeed, WHO has called for a moratorium on boosting until the benefits of primary vaccination have been made available to more people around the world.18 This is a compelling issue, particularly as the currently available evidence does not show the need for widespread use of booster vaccination in populations that have received an effective primary vaccination regimen.That is a good article. This one is pretty good too.
-
1
-
-
-
The danger of the preprint server just showed up.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.13.21262182v2
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-19-vaccine-study-error-anti-vaxxers-1.6188806
-
2
-
2
-
-
This is probably purely coincidental, but there was a study published earlier this month that screened the national blood supply (about 1.5 million people) for infection and vaccination antibodies and it was determined about 20% of the population had COVID as of May 2021, which is about what the survey reflects at the time of me writing this post.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2784013
-
1
-
Several shot during 3rd night of Kenosha riots
in Cloak Room
Posted
The reporting on this story reinforces the polling regarding the trust in media:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/355526/americans-trust-media-dips-second-lowest-record.aspx