Valerie wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:20 am
Yesterday i heard from a former co-worker who was at my register, that they we're pulling the plug on her husband yesterday. I had seen prayer requests for him but no details of what was going on so I've been praying thinking maybe it was something else.
When she told me I just broke down and cried. He made it through his covid pneumonia in the hospital and they thought he was recovered but then got MRSA there. Ultimately that will be his cause of death I guess I'm not sure but it broke my heart knowing the roller coaster she's been going through-
You do not want to get MRSA
Are you saying they're going to code him as a MRSA death instead of COVID, that would be very surprising. AFAIK hospitals tend to avoid coding nosocomial deaths because it reflects poorly on them, and in some cases they don't get paid.
A gentleman in our church had the same experience. Got COVID, mild at first, then turned to pneumonia (he's in poor health, diabetes), he recovered in the hospital on just oxygen, but then developed a staff infection, which ended up being worse than the pneumonia. Thankfully it was not MRSA, that is serious stuff.
Valerie wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:20 am
Yesterday i heard from a former co-worker who was at my register, that they we're pulling the plug on her husband yesterday. I had seen prayer requests for him but no details of what was going on so I've been praying thinking maybe it was something else.
When she told me I just broke down and cried. He made it through his covid pneumonia in the hospital and they thought he was recovered but then got MRSA there. Ultimately that will be his cause of death I guess I'm not sure but it broke my heart knowing the roller coaster she's been going through-
You do not want to get MRSA
Are you saying they're going to code him as a MRSA death instead of COVID, that would be very surprising. AFAIK hospitals tend to avoid coding nosocomial deaths because it reflects poorly on them, and in some cases they don't get paid.
A gentleman in our church had the same experience. Got COVID, mild at first, then turned to pneumonia (he's in poor health, diabetes), he recovered in the hospital on just oxygen, but then developed a staff infection, which ended up being worse than the pneumonia. Thankfully it was not MRSA, that is serious stuff.
I honestly don't know how they are going to code them and it's inappropriate for me to even ask. We've all heard through this pandemic that they have labeled covid as death when there were other causes. I'm not saying this will be the case this time, but he was over the covid-but having the covid probably kept him from being able to fight the MRSA, the body being in a weekend state
What the article says (if you can’t navigate the paywall) is that immunity from prior infection DOES seem to protect people against the alpha and delta variants that have been prevalent the past two years.
But that immunity from prior infection from alpha or delta variants DOES NOT seem to be protecting people against infection by the omicron variant. At least based on preliminary data from Africa. The actual quote is that prior infection “appears to provide little protection against the omicron variant rippling across the globe”. I expect what will actually be the case is that infection by the omicron variant will provide protection against future infections by the omicron variant but that it is different enough from the previous variants that they are functionally different viruses.
The article also suggests that omicron could be the dominant variant within the US and EU within a matter of months based on its increased transmissibility. However there are still huge unknowns such as whether or not the symptoms from omicron are more mild than previous variants, and to what extent any of the vaccines provide any protection. If existing vaccines don’t provide protection then I suspect we are in for future rounds of omicron-specific boosters. It seems they have the technology to quickly roll out variant-specific boosters. It’s just a matter of manufacturing and distribution, as well as whatever additional testing and review process is required.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
What the article says (if you can’t navigate the paywall) is that immunity from prior infection DOES seem to protect people against the alpha and delta variants that have been prevalent the past two years.
But that immunity from prior infection from alpha or delta variants DOES NOT seem to be protecting people against infection by the omicron variant. At least based on preliminary data from Africa. The actual quote is that prior infection “appears to provide little protection against the omicron variant rippling across the globe”. I expect what will actually be the case is that infection by the omicron variant will provide protection against future infections by the omicron variant but that it is different enough from the previous variants that they are functionally different viruses.
The article also suggests that omicron could be the dominant variant within the US and EU within a matter of months based on its increased transmissibility. However there are still huge unknowns such as whether or not the symptoms from omicron are more mild than previous variants, and to what extent any of the vaccines provide any protection. If existing vaccines don’t provide protection then I suspect we are in for future rounds of omicron-specific boosters. It seems they have the technology to quickly roll out variant-specific boosters. It’s just a matter of manufacturing and distribution, as well as whatever additional testing and review process is required.
Last I knew, 100% of the observed cases were in vaccinated people. That article has no data, where is the data.
What the article says (if you can’t navigate the paywall) is that immunity from prior infection DOES seem to protect people against the alpha and delta variants that have been prevalent the past two years.
But that immunity from prior infection from alpha or delta variants DOES NOT seem to be protecting people against infection by the omicron variant. At least based on preliminary data from Africa. The actual quote is that prior infection “appears to provide little protection against the omicron variant rippling across the globe”. I expect what will actually be the case is that infection by the omicron variant will provide protection against future infections by the omicron variant but that it is different enough from the previous variants that they are functionally different viruses.
The article also suggests that omicron could be the dominant variant within the US and EU within a matter of months based on its increased transmissibility. However there are still huge unknowns such as whether or not the symptoms from omicron are more mild than previous variants, and to what extent any of the vaccines provide any protection. If existing vaccines don’t provide protection then I suspect we are in for future rounds of omicron-specific boosters. It seems they have the technology to quickly roll out variant-specific boosters. It’s just a matter of manufacturing and distribution, as well as whatever additional testing and review process is required.
Last I knew, 100% of the observed cases were in vaccinated people. That article has no data, where is the data.
nvm, I see the study.
What the researchers essentially found is that is that reinfections are up about 5% during the Omicron wave. so during the previous waves natural immunity was 90% effective, with Omicron this study said it was 85% effective. that number is probably much higher, because they have a hard time determining actual prior infection. For instance symptomatic infections appear to be 100% protective, but it's hard to quantify that.
As usual the NYT is lying through their teeth to scare people. This changes nothing, previous natural infection is likely nearly 100% protective, while vaccines continue to be less and less effective to new (vaccine enhanced) variants.
We got an email that our unvaccinated friend in Indiana is quaranting because hix vaccinated brother twsted positive for Covid. He said they spent 10 hours in the car together, and that his brother could hardly stay awake and was fatigued the next day as well which led him to get tested.
Our friend made a surprise visit to us in the summer when I was first getting symptoms but didn't realize I had covid- we went to dinner together but since I said I might be getting sick I advised us not to spend any time together just in case.
Our friend is blood type O which I read tends to be more resistant. So it will be interesting to see if he does not get covid after a second exposure but this one much more so spending 10 hours in the same car, to see if there might be more truth to that. My husband is type O and he didn't get it when I got it-(but did later).
Most of pur unvaxxed friends have avoided getting it- hope & pray our friend doesn't get it.
Ken wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 10:28 am
This sounds like good news
I agree - so far so good, although in some respects the jury is still out. I
We had talked about this earlier, but if the Omicron variant is more transmissive yet mild it may be a blessing in disguise, potentially outpacing more deadly variants like Delta, and leaving a relatively immune population in its wake. Ironically, it may help the pandemic burn itself out - and move us at least from a pandemic stage to an endemic flu-like stage - and normalcy.
It's too early to say at this point, but if Omicron is definitively mild, I wonder if most of the world would ever have the guts to vaccinate and boost whoever is willing, then open borders and barriers and just let Omicron run its course until most folks are either vaccinated, recovered, or some combination of both.
Ken wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 10:28 am
This sounds like good news
I agree - so far so good, although in some respects the jury is still out. I
We had talked about this earlier, but if the Omicron variant is more transmissive yet mild it may be a blessing in disguise, potentially outpacing more deadly variants like Delta, and leaving a relatively immune population in its wake. Ironically, it may help the pandemic burn itself out - and move us at least from a pandemic stage to an endemic flu-like stage - and normalcy.
It's too early to say at this point, but if Omicron is definitively mild, I wonder if most of the world would ever have the guts to vaccinate and boost whoever is willing, then open borders and barriers and just let Omicron run its course until most folks are either vaccinated, recovered, or some combination of both.
I don’t think the fact that Omicron might be mild or less deadly is necessary any reason to let an infectious disease run wild. We do’t do that with the flu or common cold, chicken pox, mumps, or measles. We still take precautions (at least most of us do) to prevent catching colds and the flu even though we know they aren’t deadly, or aren’t likely to be deadly if we aren’t elderly with other respiratory diseases. And we still vaccinate against those other common but rarely deadly diseases.
The obvious danger to letting any coronovirus run wild is that it will continue to mutate and who knows what the phi, rho, or sigma variants are going to look like. Maybe they will be equally infectious but much more deadly.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr