billeisele

No agenda. I didn't say "neglect vaccination." Just asking a simple question. The EU puts prior infection on the same footing as vaccination. On the European Commission website it says this about EU Digital COVID Certificates: "The information contained in the EU Digital COVID Certificate is limited to what is necessary to provide the certification requested. Such information includes name, date of birth, the certificate issuer and a unique identifier of the certificate. In addition: For a vaccination certificate: vaccine type and manufacturer, number of doses received, date of vaccination; For a test certificate: type of test, date and time of test, place and result; For a recovery certificate: date of positive test result, validity period." It goes to numbers: XX% vaccinated + XX% with prior infection = % of population "protected". What number did they say for herd immunity? I've seen numbers suggested in the range of 70 - 90%. This Mayo Clinic article doesn't state a % but does talk about the value of prior infection. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/herd-immunity-and-coronavirus/art-20486808

Thanks for doing the research, your skills are better than mine. Plus, I'm buried in an SS/Medicare issue. The article you linked clarifies that prior infection doesn't provide lifelong protection, especially from variants. Makes sense, just like the shot. It goes on to say, "like the vaccination, it may reduce the chances of severe illness." Back to my main comment - It seems that we should be recognizing prior infection on an equal footing with vaccination.

Moderator warning - the below article is falsely attributed to Time Magazine. It is actually from Epoch Times, a far right religious publication linked to the Falun Gong. Reader beware. Interesting. Perhaps it's time to put prior infection on the same footing as the shot. If You’ve Had COVID You’re Likely Protected for Life TIMEDecember 21, 2021 If you’ve had COVID-19, even a mild case, major congratulations to you as you’ve more than likely got long-term immunity, according to a team of researchers from Washington University School of Medicine. In fact, you’re likely to be immune for life, as is the case with recovery from many infectious agents — once you’ve had the disease and recovered, you’re immune, most likely for life. The evidence is strong and promising, and should be welcome and comforting news to a public that has spent the last year, 2020, in a panic over SARS-CoV-2. Increasingly evidence is showing that long-lasting immunity exists. Initial Reports That COVID Immunity Was Fleeting Were Flawed Seasonal coronaviruses, some of which cause common colds, yield only short-lived protective immunity, with reinfections occurring six to 12 months after the previous infection. Early data on SARS-CoV-2 also found that antibody titers declined rapidly in the first months after recovery from COVID-19, leading some to speculate that protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 may also be short-lived. Senior author of the study, Ali Ellebedy, Ph.D., an associate professor of pathology and immunology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, pointed out that this assumption is flawed, stating in a news release: “Last fall, there were reports that antibodies waned quickly after infection with the virus that causes COVID-19, and mainstream media interpreted that to mean that immunity was not long-lived. But that’s a misinterpretation of the data. It’s normal for antibody levels to go down after acute infection, but they don’t go down to zero; they plateau.” The researchers found a biphasic pattern of antibody concentrations against SARS-CoV-2, in which high antibody concentrations were found in the acute immune response that occurred at the time of initial infection. The antibodies declined in the first months after infection, as should be expected, then leveled off to about 10% to 20% of the maximum concentration detected. In a commentary on the study, Andreas Radbruch and Hyun-Dong Chang of the German Rheumatism Research Centre Berlin explained: When a new infection occurs, cells called plasmablasts provide antibodies, but when the virus is cleared, longer lasting memory B cells move in to monitor blood for signs of reinfection. Bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) also exist in bones, acting as “persistent and essential sources of protective antibodies.” According to Ellebedy, “A plasma cell is our life history, in terms of the pathogens we’ve been exposed to,” and it’s in these long-lived BMPCs were immunity to SARS-CoV-2 resides. Long-Term Immunity Likely After COVID-19 Infection For the study, blood samples were collected from 77 people who had recovered from COVID-19, about one month after the onset of symptoms; most had experienced mild cases. Additional blood samples were collected three more times at three-month intervals to track antibody production; memory B cells and bone marrow were also collected from some of the participants. Levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S) antibodies declined rapidly in the first four months after infection, then slowed over the next seven months. The most exciting part of the research is that, at both seven months and 11 months after infection, most of the participants had BMPCs that secreted antibodies specific for the spike protein encoded by SARS-CoV-2. The BMPCs were found in amounts similar to those found in people who had been vaccinated against tetanus or diphtheria, which are considered to provide long-lasting immunity. “Overall, our data provide strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans robustly establishes the two arms of humoral immune memory: long-lived BMPCs and memory B cells,” the researchers noted. This is perhaps the best available evidence of long-lasting immunity, Radbruch and Chang explained, because this immunological memory is a distinct part of the immune system that’s essential to long-term protection, beyond the initial immune response to the virus: In addition, in 2020 it was reported that people who had recovered from SARS-CoV — a virus that is genetically closely related to SARS-CoV-2 and belongs to the same viral species — maintained significant levels of neutralizing antibodies at least 17 years after initial infection. This also suggests that long-term immunity against SARS-CoV-2 should be expected. Ellebedy even said the protection is likely to continue “indefinitely”: References Nature May 24, 2021 NewsWise May 24, 2021 Nature June 14, 2021 Nature. 1997 Jul 10;388(6638):133-4. doi: 10.1038/40540 Nature May 26, 2021 Adv Immunol. 2002;80:115-81. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2776(02)80014-1 Nature. 1997 Jul 10;388(6638):133-4. doi: 10.1038/40540 European Journal of Immunology May 19, 2021 Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020; 9(1): 900–902

Minimize exposure, be extra careful around those that are vaccinated, and avail oneself of all available options. T Hope everyone has a safe and enjoyable holiday season.

An interesting perspective - Pandemic Could Be Solved Quickly If Politics Thrown Out: Dr. Ben Carson BY HARRY LEE AND JAN JEKIELEK December 16, 2021 Updated: December 16, 2021gersmaller “We’ve been having tunnel vision” dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Ben Carson told EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program. “Let’s throw the politics out. We could solve this problem pretty quickly,” he stated in an interview that will premiere on Dec. 18 at 7 p.m. New York time. “Let’s open this thing up to all the different mechanisms,” said Carson, a renowned neurosurgeon who was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom—the highest civilian award in the nation—in 2008 for his work. He retired in 2013 and ran for the presidency in 2016, before serving as the secretary of Housing and Urban Development during the Trump administration. “Let’s look around the world at things that work. Let’s look at the fact that on the western coast of Africa, there’s almost no COVID. And let’s ask ourselves, why is that? And then you see, it’s because they take antimalarials, particularly hydroxychloroquine. Let’s study that. Let’s see what’s going on there. “Let’s listen to these physician groups who’ve had incredible success with ivermectin. Let’s look at the results with monoclonal antibodies. Let’s look at all of these things. Let’s put them all in our armamentarium so that we don’t have a one-size-fits-all system.” The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) at one time had authorized hydroxychloroquine for treating certain COVID-19 patients but quickly revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) in June 2020, claiming no data showed its effectiveness. The FDA hasn’t approved or issued an EUA for ivermectin to treat COVID-19, citing the same reasons. Using hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients has been highly controversial. Some studies show, and some doctors claim, that hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin can effectively treat COVID-19 patients. A vaccine confidence insight report (pdf) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) labeled such claims as misinformation or disinformation. “COVID is a virus. Viruses mutate. That’s what they do. And they will continue to mutate,” Carson said. Carson pointed out that fortunately, most of the time, viruses become a little weaker with each mutation. “We can admit that and deal with it, or we can take every little mutation and every little change and try to make it into a crisis so we can frighten people and control their lives more,” Carson said. The latest variant has been named Omicron. During a White House COVID-19 Task Force briefing on Dec. 15, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said that she expected Omicron cases to increase in the coming weeks, urging people to take preventive measures such as being vaccinated and getting booster doses. Carson said he has some concerns with how COVID-19 is being utilized to “manipulate and frighten people.” “We should be using every tool available to us to fight the pandemic. There’s no question about that,” Carson said. “But that means, you know, therapeutics, which had been poo-pooed. And I understand why. Because in order to get an EUA—an emergency use authorization—to pursue the vaccines, you can’t have anything that’s effective as an alternative. So, that’s a defect in our system, we need to get rid of that. “I think a lot of people died unnecessarily because we had that attitude,” Carson added. He shared that when he contracted COVID and was severely ill, monoclonal antibodies saved his life. He said monoclonal antibodies weren’t really utilized the way they should have been early on. The FDA issued its first EUA for monoclonal antibodies to treat COVID-19 patients in November 2020. “There are many things that have been very effective that we have not pursued, including natural immunity,” Carson said. “Well, why wouldn’t you collect that information? Why wouldn’t you want to know that? The only reason you wouldn’t do that is because you didn’t want to know the answer,” he said. “Because it didn’t fit very neatly into what you’re trying to do, which is get everybody to be vaccinated.” That’s one of the reasons people are losing confidence in federal health agencies, he suggested. Last month, the CDC said it had no record of naturally immune people transmitting the CCP virus. “A lot of people who probably should be vaccinated are not doing it because they see these inconsistencies, these things that make absolutely no sense,” Carson said. “This demand that everybody get a vaccination, except if you’re coming across the southern border illegally, then it’s not all that important.” Carson also opposes forcing children to be vaccinated. “We have a situation where you have the government advocating that children be vaccinated, even though the risk for death for a child with COVID is 0.025 percent, essentially the same as it is for seasonal flu. You don’t see us doing all this every year for seasonal flu,” Carson stated. “The risk of mortality for a healthy child is approaching zero, and yet we’re saying do this without knowing what the long-term risks are?” he said. “And why would you subject an innocent child to a lifetime of unknown risk? It just makes absolutely no sense. “We need to have faith in our government. We need to have faith in our health care systems. And by injecting politics into it, I think we have put ourselves behind the eight ball. It’s going to take a while to reestablish that trust,” he said. “Why not learn how to look at what’s logical and what makes sense? And why not encourage discussion of those things, rather than everybody getting their respective corners and shooting hand grenades at each other?” The way out is real leadership, he said. “The only path is strong leadership. We don’t have that.”

Just watched to 2 hour 48 minute Dan Gryder video. Whether it's true of not, it's interesting and entertaining.

Nah. They were out tracking all those balloons that kill birds and turtles and stuff.

Wendy - No doubt that the constant negative barrage on just about anything that's different from what appears to be the majority opinion is off putting. The labeling and name calling is not good. I do post less and less. It's no longer fun, but it's educational to understand how other folks see things. As an example, this topic is one I didn't reply to until now. Having said that - I've had a few off line convos that have been respectful and educational. And there are some posters that have strong opposing opinions and are respectful. Those are the enjoyable conversations.

Here we are with open and free FL rocking along for another week with the lowest case rate per 100,000 residents in the country. While the more restrictive states of CA, NY, CT and IL continue to climb. FL 8.63, CA 17.8, CT 40, IL 56.4 and NY 65. The rate of increase should be concerning. FL has been on this general track for 40 days. The increase in the other states started: CA 2 days ago, NY 40 days ago, CT 38 days ago, IL 40 days ago. The CA data isn't showing a trend. They have been jumping up and down for 45 days after a marked decrease. The other states are more troublesome with steady increases over the period. So many factors and causes for these numbers. I'm wondering if the start of the winter season in the north with folks indoors will drive these increases higher. We'll continue to watch the trend. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#compare-trends&sel0=CA,IL,NY,CT,FL To get a quick view of the whole country use this https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#cases_casesper100klast7days

Joe - that's an easy question. NO. It's ridiculous that in this country the only two choices were Trump and Biden. There are so many other highly qualified individuals. My post was about the bias of the media. Question for you: Is the media treating Biden with the same scrutiny that they treated Trump?

Good morning. Help me understand how labeling one a "racist" because they banned travel from a country where COVID was booming is accurate.

lol - so shallow, childish and incorrect When folks make excuses for poor behavior it encourages that behavior. This is not about what nations are doing. It's about actions of the the media. It's not about my opinion of Trump. It's about how the media behaves.

Woo Hoo - Biden restricts travel from South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Lesotho, Eswatini, Mozambique and Malawi. If Trump did it it would be racist. Mainstream media is full of folks that are quick to judge and label, but detest being judged or labeled.

Holiday week report: Normalized data on # of new cases reported per 100,000. First number is a month ago, second number is Nov 7, third is Nov 21, and the trend over that period. The source is CDC. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#compare-trends FL - 10.2, 7.2, 7.2 steady SC - 20.7, 12.7, 9.2 down CA - 13.9, 16.2, 10.8 down CT - 12.6, 10, 20.7 up IL - 16.4, 19.7, 31.9 up NY - 28.9, 29.5, 46.5 up Legend Daily case data graphs Cumulative Data

That study, "must be flawed", "it can't be correct", "someone is trying to undermine our successes", etc. If the science doesn't fit the narrative then the science is wrong. Right?

Another out of context comment. Either you didn't read or didn't comprehend the post. I was addressing the historic past of men killing their wives and getting away with it. The specific statement was, "Woman killed while husband cleaning shotgun in living room." This was in refence to Baldwin using the excuse of, "I was told it was unloaded." The point being that, IMO, the person holding the gun should be responsible for what occurs. As to what you posted. These things are all too common and until gun users are held responsible for what occurs, they will continue. This one is under investigation and hopefully there will be consequences. Scroll down a little further in your link and you'll read about the 3-year old that picked up a gun in her house and shot herself. Another case of a gun owner not take proper precautions with a firearm. That one is in Richland County, home of the Sheriff of the Year Lean Lott. I guarantee that Leon will press charges.

Don't remember much about Nick but didn't he not sue many others that he could have sued? I think CNN and Washington Post took the big hits. I think the WP settlement was $250 million.

Bill - I agree with most of what you said but you either missed the context of the convo or chose to ignore it.. I was replying to the statement, "..almost no-one actually needs an F150 at all, its worse for almost everything that they get used for than a mid sized car." Discussing why a mid-size car would not be acceptable. In addition I said that folks that occasionally need that big truck to go much farther than the range of an EV won't be buying the EV. No doubt that EVs will grow in popularity, and continue to evolve offering more options and range thus making them acceptable to a wider range of buyers. Today a super nice GMC Denali 2500 diesel is in the $83K range. Folks are clearly willing to spend a ton of money on a vehicle. That will help EV sales.

I watched a 8+ hours of the trial. It was the prosecutors job to prove guilt. He failed miserably. A couple items on the prosecutor: When he was questioning a key prosecution witness, Grosskreuzt, the guy basically made the case for the defense. He said something to the effect of - I ran to the scene from a couple blocks away, approached Kyle, pointed my pistol at him (he was within 6' of Kyle), and that's when I was shot. In that picture that is my arm exploding. Yes, I'm holding a pistol in that picture. At that point the other prosecuting attorney laid his head on the table and covered his face. When the prosecutor was questioning Kyle about why he shot Grosskreuzt, he said, "it was only a pistol." Was the prosecutor that ignorant about guns or just making the absurd statement that a pistol wasn't dangerous? There were other witnesses that stated how Kyle was chased, attacked, knocked down, kicked, hit on the head with a skateboard, etc., by the two that he killed. There was video backing up the testimony. Watching the video one could infer that 17-year old Kyle finally realized he was in grave danger and was running towards the police to escape while these attacks occurred. Not smart but not illegal. The jury took 32 hours before rendering the verdict. On day 2 or 3 of deliberations they asked to review the videos, presumably to get clarity on what they remembered. One juror asked to review the judges instructions, again, presumably to make sure they understood what they were doing. It seems that they took the time to review everything and determined that it was self defense. Many comments I'm seeing on social media clearly show that people didn't watch the trial and don't know the basic facts, or simply are ignoring the facts that don't match their opinion. It was self-defense, at least according to the jury. Regardless of the legality, he was wreck less to have been there and he's lucky he wasn't killed. To me the real issue is the politicians getting involved and the police not enforcing the law to stop the rioting. It will be interesting to see the civil cases that come next. There are quite a few outspoken celebrities that made slanderous statements well-before knowing any of the evidence. Joy Reid, Biden, MSNBC and plenty of other media outlets could be on the list.

And the authoritative cite for those claims is? The fishing, hunting and boating groups I'm in would disagree. Most use them for daily drivers going less than 100 miles. Then many use the truck to tow their boat many times to distanced lakes. They also use them weekly to go to nearby boat ramps. The truck has the horsepower and weight to safely tow the boat, and to control it on the angled ramp. It has the bed storage to haul the needed gear. The hunting crowd hauls trailers with a 4-wheeler and has a dog box in the bed of the truck. The high clearance and 4-wheel drive is needed on the dirt roads and in the woods. My construction friends use their trucks to haul trailers and put heavy materials in the truck. Again the towing capacity and weight of the truck is needed to safely control the load. Having said that, I agree that some that drive a truck don't actually need a truck. I have no clue what percentage that is. I guess if an ineffective jab can be mandatory then an edict is justified to require proof of "need" of a truck. Or maybe because this is America we are free to make our own decisions within the constraints of the law. I worry for the F250 and F350 crowd. Are they next on the persecution list?

There will always be the Early Adopters. The question will be what happens after that group is finished buying. It will be interesting to see if/how Lucid is able to meet their claims. They have a long way to go. The F150 product is interesting and may satisfy many users. Most wouldn't use the truck to the max daily capability so no problem. The challenge comes with the group that rarely uses the max but still needs to be able to go that 400+ mile pulling a trailer. Then there are the electric requirements and how they will be solved. The grid and power plant guys are doing some head scratching and continue to say it will cost a ton of money. Many issues to be solved and new ones will arise. It will be interesting to watch.

So about the prop gun killing? Wonder what the DA will decide on that incident. Personally, it seems that claiming, "I was told it wasn't loaded", isn't too strong of a defense. Here is SC, going back 20ish years, it seems that we had at least one "accidental" shooting annually. The news articles typically said, "Woman killed while husband cleaning shotgun in living room." They finally started prosecuting those cases and surprisingly they stopped.

Hilarious. Jamaica doesn't have brake shops they have horn replacement shops.

I don't have any special or inside knowledgeable about insurance but .... I often wondered why one brand would have that type of large increase and another wouldn't. I was shopping insurance and an agent told me that if they have higher than expected claims the rates are adjusted to recover those expenses. He said they tend to work on a rolling 3-year average but that wasn't an exact science. The company I was talking to had a fairly high exposure because they insured property along the coast and we had a flooding event. In addition there were tornados in other states where they had a high concentration of customers. They stopped writing policies for coastal properties and dropped some of their customers to reduce exposure. The other company that I spoke with said that they didn't even write policies in coastal areas, they have high margins but high risk. Makes sense.

On a smaller time frame what's occurring where I live is: 3 weeks ago we were around $2.85, over a 5 day period it stepped up to $3.05 and stayed there for a week. Then a week ago three stations were at $2.77, that lasted 4 days. Then it went to $2.88 for 2 days. Yesterday, at the station I usually use, the morning price was $2.88, the afternoon was $2.99. A main competitor 2 blocks away was $2.77, then followed to $2.88 and stayed there. The guys that owns that station has a couple other stations, one of them was $2.84. Filled up the big truck and got 15g of ethanol free in cans at $3.35. We are 60 miles from the fuel terminal in North Augusta, SC. That proximity helps to keep the price lower, trucking is part of the price. When I was working the terminal was one of my customers. It was interesting to learn how they operate, mix fuels, load trucks, etc. Interestingly, each type fuel, ethanol, and the various additives are stored in different tanks. Everything is added and mixed as the truck is loaded. We don't have any shortages or other easily identifiable reasons for these swings. Maybe it's just local stations competing. They make much higher margins on sodas, beer, energy drinks and snacks. Attracting drivers for those purchases may be the reason.