knehrke

So, here's a quick follow up from the powers-that-be at Strong (and associated health care systems). No one who has received either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine here has developed a reaction severe enough to warrant admission to the ICU. I can't speak to other heath care systems, but we are in the tens of thousands of doses administered. If anyone is interested, the CDC maintains a searchable web-based platform for reporting adverse reactions, which is readily accessible from their COVID portal. Information is updated weekly, and is reported for all types of vaccinations, not just the COVID-19 vaccines. Stay safe, stay sane, and get outdoors!

My wife had the vaccine (Pfizer version) yesterday, with the normal soreness developing that you'd see with a flu shot. Most of the docs at Strong have gotten their shots, and I haven't heard about any severe adverse reactions, but I can check in with the folks in charge to see whether they are making this data public and if so, where.

So, here's a good thought exercise. If people were getting the sniffles and nobody was dying, would you support the government's ability to issue executive mandates? If people were turning into zombies and eating each other, would that change your mind? Somewhere in between those alternatives lies our current reality. If you answered yes to the second question, then, as the punchline to a famous joke goes, "What are you? I thought we'd established that, now we're just negotiating price." There's a line in the sand where folks decide that the situation mandates decisions being made for the public good by a central authority. Where that line occurs is really subjective, just like the viewpoints on how bad this surge will get. Ask a nurse in LA county and they'll likely have a different opinion that a rancher in Montana. But if that line exists for you, then it's really just a matter of negotiating what's enough. So, while I respect other's right to state their opinions, in our society majority rules (okay, theoretically and arguably lol). And siding with the authorities doesn't make people "sheep", as I've heard on here more than once. It just means they have a different viewpoint as to where their own line exists. It's not a failure to see what's in front of our faces. It's not fear. We're not lemmings. I myself analyze the numbers on a daily basis, and my decisions are driven by data. If they differ from yours, that sounds like the start of a good conversation.

Back in April, I didn't know anyone who had the virus. Now, I know lots of folks, and everybody seems to know someone. One of the guys I know got it at deer camp and is currently in the ICU, thankfully doing better since being in an induced coma for quite a while. We are keeping our fingers crossed. We are at capacity, and the front line workers are reaching their limits. How can you ask someone who's trying to save lives 14 hours a day to find time to administer a vaccine? The worst hit areas are having the hardest time getting shots in folks' arms. Kudos to science and big pharma for their collaboration and unprecedented success in developing a vaccine. Kudos to the government for cutting through the red tape, while ensuring safety standards are met. Shame on the lack of a national rollout plan. They've only had months to develop it...

I'm not a fan of the emperor, but how is it wrong to restrict these initial doses of the vaccine to those who may benefit the most? Or our most vulnerable population? If you lower the number from 75 to 65, which is what you appear to be advocating, then demand exceeds supply, which you acknowledge. ??? Here, we have been prioritizing getting our front line health care workers who serve the most vulnerable populations vaccinated first, since that's where the vaccine is likely to do the most good, most quickly. I know that there has been lots of discretion given at the local level; I'm not as sure that this discretion has led to entirely wise choices. But nitpicking at this point is counterproductive. Nobody is going to be entirely satisfied at the rollout. Keep those doses coming!!

Hey Versatile, I like the way you think, but I know that there's an often-spoken opinion at the top that the clarity of the message can trump its accuracy. IMHO, that can turn around and bite us in the keister. I'd rather give people the facts and let them make up their own mind, even if it's not necessarily the outcome that health care professionals would like to see. Unfortunately, sometimes the school of hard knocks is the best source of learning. Every individual in our society wants to make up their own mind, whether they have access to or interest in the resources to make an informed choice or not. Knowing that, I'd opt for transparency every time. Shout the message, let folks work it out on their own. That's why I'm writing this. As for the UK variant and the vaccine, it's impossible to predict whether the mutations might be hitting an antigenic hotspot, but even so your body's response is going to produce a repertoire of antibodies, some of which should - hopefully - still hit the target. Think of it like a shotgun blast. Hopefully, some of the pellets still make the mark, even if that "magic BB" doesn't. The permutations are too complex to predict with any great accuracy, so empirical evidence is required, and there is a chance that it will be less effective. Only time will tell.

It seems like it's time to weigh in with my useless - though not uninformed - opinion. I teach this stuff to medical students. Yeah, I'm a PhD, but one of the smart ones, okay? Lol. Anyway, while I'm fairly sure that this vaccine will end up being safe, and I spent a page explaining why earlier in this thread, I'm not arrogant enough to presume that I can predict the unforeseen consequences (hence "unforeseen") with perfect clarity. Sometimes science gets it wrong. In this case, I'd bet my life on being right, but I won't bet yours. Everyone needs to make up their mind for themselves as to whether they think that the risk is worth the reward. But remember, it's not just a risk to yourself, but to society and to those you love. If you get sick, perhaps without symptoms, and you pass it on, you could impact another life. We still can't predict who is going to have poor outcomes beyond age being the best prognosticator, but it's not a negligible risk, despite what certain pundits might claim. Over 10% mortality in Mexico. Why? Million dollar question. I will take the vaccine when offered it. If you choose not to, peace - but please stay safe and protect yourself and your loved ones. Happy New Year!

I hate to pop the logic bubble, but this is not that difficult to explain. Imagine you're being chased by a chipmunk and a bear. You outrun the chipmunk because you are faster than the chipmunk. The bear eats your a$$ because you are slower than the bear. You are running the same speed in both cases. If you'd run faster (or paid a bit more attention to your mask), you wouldn't be on the menu. It's all a matter of relative infectiousness and susceptibility when comparing influenza and SARS-CoV2. I'm sure that I don't have to say this, but influenza is the chipmunk and SARS-CoV2 is the bear. Less confused now? Cool. My wife says that my analogy sucks and I should have led with the last part first. But I like the chipmunk and bear, so I'm keeping it this way.

Now that's an interesting subject - while it's reprehensible for government to force vaccination (or sterilization, of any of the BS they've done over the years) - can an employer? I suspect that they can, so long as they permit an "out", such as having to wear a mask, face shield, and gloves in-house. That's what we've had to do in order to instruct undergraduates in person in a laboratory setting, and I bet the same will be true moving forward, vaccine or no.

So, an mRNA vaccine is certainly different, but not entirely untested. There have been a number of them around for many years, just smaller scale - rabies, I think? Regardless, this type of technology and the delivery systems used to administer the mRNA itself are the future of medicine. RNA interference and synthetic interfering RNAs are administered the same way, and these approaches have the potential to treat currently untreatable diseases. Since your body normally makes mRNA, there's not much concern that you will react poorly to it. Without DNA to keep making the mRNA, it will get made into protein, then rapidly degraded. In fact, the mRNA never makes it into the nucleus where DNA resides, so there's no 'genetic modification". The protein that the mRNA makes is part of the viral repertoire and should induce an antibody response, but again perfectly normal, the same as if you were exposed to a "conventional" vaccine consisting of dead virus. A key point here is that when you're infected with an RNA virus normally, you get a dose of the viral genome in RNA format. So the vaccine is giving you a mini-cold that only contains a small part of what you'd see with a virus, and it can't self replicate. The larger question is the delivery system. There was a a kaffuffle a decade ago on "dynamic polyconjugates", which were at the time the latest and greatest nucleic acid delivery system. Unfortunately, it didn't work, and there were some animal fatalities in testing. But it was quickly found to be inappropriate for human use and never made it to trials. The current methodology has been vetted thoroughly. There will be some individuals who have inflammatory reactions, but this is expected - you try to induce an immune response, even an acquired one, and sometimes the innate immune system kicks in too. Regardless, everyone needs to make up their own mind in terms of their willingness to vaccinate. We are not returning to a society where we forcibly vaccinate our population, nor test new vaccines on underrepresented populations. What a fiasco. A total biomedical ethical disaster. But please make an informed decision and conscious choice based on the best available evidence. Choose wisely.

We don't name our stands by anything except location until they earn a name. Some of the better ones are "The Three Hour Stand" because it took three hours of sweating our arses off in 80 degree heat to get it set, "The Boner Stand", not because we're looking for bone, but because my buddy gets so excited to hunt it, and "The Nipple Tree", which started off as the dimple tree, but being directly across the swamp from the boner quickly adopted the moniker nipple instead. But we're normal. Honestly...

Exactly!! During bow season, I'm on high alert, bow in hand most of the time, and for good reason. During gun though, I can go days without seeing a deer. I bought a pair of finger touch gloves so that I can work my screen without freezing my hands off. Boooorrrring... I used to love drives. We only had a few guys, so we'd focus on small areas with known exits. We'd often push deer, sometimes chose to shoot deer, and always had a good time. More often than not, now I'm home by 10:30 am during gun.

I wonder if it's injury related? If so, he may hold to the same characteristics next year.

Although I agree that our FDA sets the bar for safety and an example to the world - is your entire method of arguing to make fun of what other people think, without providing any substantiating evidence to the contrary? As much as this has been amusing, I must recuse myself - my status as a thinking human being precludes further wasting of time. I will say that I don't disagree with you completely. lol. Please don't post four responses to this.

Wait, I thought you said that we were first? Can you ever just admit that you might have made a mistake and leave it at that? So many problems would be solved if folks were just willing to admit they were wrong and move on. It's this adolescent need to be right, and to have our rightness acknowledged widely, that gets us into some serious trouble. And if you can't be right, divert. "Look over there!!". As a scientist, I'm used to being wrong. That's how we move forward,. We are constantly building new models on the bones of our old ones. Inching closer to the truth. You never get there without accepting your mistakes. And FYI, I will listen to the FDA and my friends who are conducting the vaccine trials - I am not going to rule anything out just because it was developed in another country. Would you take the Oxford vaccine? We were at war with England 200 years ago lol. Efficacy and safety. So long as it comes vetted, I'm good.

So, you do know I'm a senior biomedical researcher at the front of the field right? With good friends who have been involved in the process of developing and testing various types of COVID vaccines? If you're trying to make a claim that I don't know what I'm talking about...that dog won't hunt. But say it loud enough. I'm sure some folks will listen lol. And in fact, Russia's vaccine was first. But who's counting? And China right there, too. But why let facts matter? It's all Trump, all the time. His war on Science is what's real, and I don't get how he thinks you can crap where you eat. But I agree that there was an unprecedented GLOBAL push to develop a vaccine, with cooperation between government, industry, and academia. As is appropriate and warranted. And I'm not bashing Trump. I'm just saying that his taking credit for this is simply ludicrous. Now, when you start talking about China stealing IP - that's 100% correct. A senior Raytheon official working on defense contracts was just indicted this week. Chinese immigrant, naturalized, who sent secrets back to the homeland. It happen a lot. In biomedical research, too. I've actually found several of my own published papers republished without attribution in Chinese language journals. And yet there are some great Chinese scientists who are close friends, so we've got to balance that...

Thank you for marginalizing the efforts of all of my colleagues who have worked diligently to combat this virus. Trump has made our job harder, not easier, and he certainly didn't light a fire under anyone's nether region - he didn't need to, the virus itself, which he downplayed at every turn, was sufficient motivation in and of itself. Everything good comes from Trump, everything bad comes from the Dems, right? Stop lapping up whatever that guy pukes into the twittersphere. I'm a Republican, have been forever, but for most people trying to fight this thing, the virus isn't political, and efforts to make it so are simply repugnant. The biggest problem we face is dogmatic arguments that ignore logic and facts. It's easy to throw shade, try being part of the solution.

Hello, Mr. Phantom: What is your feeling now that we've passed the election, the virus is spiking in a third wave, and the news is uniformly dismal? Still a ploy to oust Trump? Time for everybody to get real, stop denying, stop making it political, and come together like the great nation we are to nip this in the bud. I'm in this fight until the end, but that's always been true. I am a scientist. Respectfully, KNehrke

My buddy who studies game theory told me weeks ago that this was the play: knowing that the mail-in vote would swing Democrat, Trump would claim victory the day of the election then as the mirage dissipated, he'd claim fraud and that "they" were stealing the election. He hit the nail on the head. It was so, so predictable. Despite the fact that each state's policy for counting votes and deadlines was clearly established prior to the election. Despite that the counting is still going on in states that he has already won (like Texas, where last I saw only 86% of the vote had been counted). No lawsuits filed there though. And despite the fact that both parties have had many, many observers present as the counting occurs, to ensure transparency. I think that Biden is a milksop and Harris is dangerous. But I respect the rule of law.

You'd be surprised at the number of folks I run into who believe that the whole thing was made up for political purposes. But I agree with you that it's been leveraged to death. What isn't, during election season? Time to go leverage some bucks - hopefully running does hard, thinking that hunters are just something made up to keep them from doing the nasty

That's right. And the Illuminati will reveal themselves and the aliens will fly down to take photos and they'll finally let us know about the second gunman. It takes a special kind of person to make a worldwide epidemic into a political chip. Do you think that Europe, India, Russia, Australia...well, everywhere I guess...are in on the plan? And if they're in on it, what's their motivation? Inquiring minds want to know.

Small properties and hedgerow hunting favor competition for prime locations. We have stands near boundaries, but have never, ever shot over the line. We've let some nice bucks walk, too. I like to think that the same is true for our neighbors. Thus far, there have been no issues, and I've never had to alter plans because I've found a neighbor in a stand near mine.

You're right, it's life not nature. Goldblum said it, Crichton wrote it. I stand corrected! I hereby relinquish my mancard for improper use of movie quotes! It's a dark day lol... Regardless, go, hunt, and have fun storming the castle.

First- this was a joke. But second, UV light does not penetrate aqueous surfaces well. So, if the virus is encapsulated in fluid, such as saliva or drinking water shared between animals, it could propagate. But the same is true for nearly all viruses. So the answer is really "it depends". And if it is at all possible, then Michael Crichton had it right - Nature will find a way. But catching C19 from a deer is the last thing I'd be worried about.

Tis the season!!! It's like six degrees of separation: how many posts will it take for any thread to turn to politics? Less, the closer we get to the election. But back on topic - deer camp during the age of COVID. Does anyone wonder if deer can get C19? We know that cats and ferrets can (I know because my wife and collaborators work with both models to study vision). How sick would that be (no pun intended), if the deer you just shot got even with you posthumously? Things I am not going to think about...