Stores and restaurants re-closing due to COVID

[QuarterMillionMan]

Los Angeles highest numbers to date, 4244 new cases today, 72 new deaths today. To make matters worse, downtown Los Angeles has protesters with 100's of police in tactical riot gear, not sure why but here we go again.

[disneysteve]

I prefer good news... Like this one! https://apnews.com/e4d5259bfc6c74fcb090d885737c55a6

Seems that they've gotten the initial results back for one of the many vaccines in development, finding that it was effective at protecting against COVID with minimal side effects.

We all certainly hope that is true. There is still a great deal of uncertainty about immunity.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/14/immunity-to-covid-19-uk-study.html

So folks who have had COVID, may not be immune for very long and be prone to reinfection later.

That does not mean that a vaccine wouldn't work, though, but could mean that EVERYONE needs the vaccine, even those who have already had COVID.

[bjl584]

We all certainly hope that is true. There is still a great deal of uncertainty about immunity.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/14/immunity-to-covid-19-uk-study.html

So folks who have had COVID, may not be immune for very long and be prone to reinfection later.

That does not mean that a vaccine wouldn't work, though, but could mean that EVERYONE needs the vaccine, even those who have already had COVID.

Do you think it's a good idea to go get a new vaccine?
I get a flu shot every year, but the flu vaccine is pretty tried and true.

I saw a documentary about pandemics.
Apparently there was a vaccine developed back in the early 70's for a virus.
But it ended up causing brain damage and death to multiple recipients.
Would it be better to wait until the kinks are worked out before rushing out for a Covid vaccine?

[kork13]

That's part of the reason they do multiple rounds of testing, to include a large scale trial with 10s of thousands of participants, and normally do so over the course of months and years.... To hopefully recognize some of the more rare side-effects. Putting a rush on all of this is almost certain to lead to some things being overlooked or unrecognized. At that point it becomes a question of risk acceptance... Is it more important to get a vaccine quickly that's safe for 99.99% of recipients, or getting a 99.9999% safe vaccine 3 years from now? Those numbers are random, but the point is that in most cases, the incidence of harm will be measured in 1 of thousands, 1 of ten thousands, or fewer. They test to find what they can, but sometimes, in cases such as this, higher incidence is often an accepted risk.

[disneysteve]

The problem is that we have become an anti-science nation. If a vaccine came out tomorrow, it’s likely that 40-45% of Americans would refuse to get it because of garbage they read on the internet. Even if it is 100% effective, which it won’t be, only 60% of people would be protected which is well below what’s needed for herd immunity. And if it’s 70% effective which is more likely that’s even worse.

Should you get a new vaccine? Absolutely. Will people do it? A very large group will not.

[kork13]

The problem is that we have become an anti-science nation. If a vaccine came out tomorrow, it’s likely that 40-45% of Americans would refuse to get it because of garbage they read on the internet. Even if it is 100% effective, which it won’t be, only 60% of people would be protected which is well below what’s needed for herd immunity. And if it’s 70% effective which is more likely that’s even worse.

Should you get a new vaccine? Absolutely. Will people do it? A very large group will not.

I think 40-50% refusal is a bit of an overstatement. Most vaccines have a 70-90% acceptance rate (10-30% refuse them). Even with how politicized COVID has become, people are still concerned by it, and I read an article a week or two ago citing a survey finding that roughly 75% of people will/likely will get vaccinated once available. Especially if schools & employers start to require it, the vaccine will be used. Enough to establish herd immunity (if that's even possible with this virus -- I think I saw John Hopkins estimating 85%)? Maybe not. But it will still protect a large swath of the population.

[cypher1]

That's part of the reason they do multiple rounds of testing, to include a large scale trial with 10s of thousands of participants, and normally do so over the course of months and years.... To hopefully recognize some of the more rare side-effects. Putting a rush on all of this is almost certain to lead to some things being overlooked or unrecognized. At that point it becomes a question of risk acceptance... Is it more important to get a vaccine quickly that's safe for 99.99% of recipients, or getting a 99.9999% safe vaccine 3 years from now? Those numbers are random, but the point is that in most cases, the incidence of harm will be measured in 1 of thousands, 1 of ten thousands, or fewer. They test to find what they can, but sometimes, in cases such as this, higher incidence is often an accepted risk.

People can label me ignorant on this subject. But I'd fall into that 3yr mark for taking a vaccination. I can honestly say even if a vaccine came out at the beginning of next year, I'd be hesitant to accept, given the concern and rush. I thought most testing takes years (or even 3 seems low) to monitor the effects on patients, and would still question the long-term effects.

So in the long run, yes, I'd accept. But in the meantime, I'll let those that are more high risk or have pre-existing health concerns take it first, as well as the politicians and professional athletes. Which opens up another can of worms; when the vaccine is out, who gets it first in this country? Those that can afford it, or a system based on need for those at high risk for priority?

[disneysteve]

I think 40-50% refusal is a bit of an overstatement. Most vaccines have a 70-90% acceptance rate (10-30% refuse them). Even with how politicized COVID has become, people are still concerned by it, and I read an article a week or two ago citing a survey finding that roughly 75% of people will/likely will get vaccinated once available. Especially if schools & employers start to require it, the vaccine will be used. Enough to establish herd immunity (if that's even possible with this virus -- I think I saw John Hopkins estimating 85%)? Maybe not. But it will still protect a large swath of the population.

People can label me ignorant on this subject. But I'd fall into that 3yr mark for taking a vaccination.

Perfect illustration right here. Studies show that about 45% of Americans have doubts about vaccine safety. That doesn't mean they are adamantly anti-vaccine. That percentage is smaller. But it does mean that they might opt out of getting a vaccine they don't feel they really need, or delay getting it to see what happens to everyone who does. I don't think cypher1 is ignorant at all, and I think many others feel the same way. So if the vaccine comes out in January and maybe 20% just outright refuse any and all vaccines and another 20-25% take a wait and see approach, it might be 3-5 years before that vaccine reaches a significant majority of the population.

Certainly, any protection is better than no protection, so even if only 50% of people get it early on, that's at least 35% (assuming at least a 70% efficacy rate) of folks who will be protected. That's far better than 100% vulnerability.

[QuarterMillionMan]

On the news today the Los Angeles county BOS said now only testing people with symptoms, essential workers & first responders, hospital workers, and people who may have been in contact with a positive COVID person, and lower SES Blacks/Hispanics.No longer testing asymptomatics nor anyone. Shortage of tests and long wait times for results on the average of 5 - 7 days lag time.

[disneysteve]

On the news today the Los Angeles county BOS said now only testing people with symptoms, essential workers & first responders, hospital workers, and people who may have been in contact with a positive COVID person, and lower SES Blacks/Hispanics.No longer testing asymptomatics nor anyone. Shortage of tests and long wait times for results on the average of 5 - 7 days lag time.

That’s highly disturbing considering that asymptomatic carriers are such a huge source of contagion.

[cypher1]

That’s highly disturbing considering that asymptomatic carriers are such a huge source of contagion.

I agree. I just canceled my L.A. flight on Monday due to CA rolling back to phase 1. Then last night my buddy (I was supposed to stay with), just got his results of being positive, yesterday. He has no symptoms (actually feels great), but his other friends did, and all got tested since their gathering on 7/3 (we're pretty sure contagion was that date since it was the only day together), and then he couldn't get tested till 6 days later (with no symptoms), then get the results 5 days afterwards.

[disneysteve]

I agree. I just canceled my L.A. flight on Monday due to CA rolling back to phase 1. Then last night my buddy (I was supposed to stay with), just got his results of being positive, yesterday. He has no symptoms (actually feels great), but his other friends did, and all got tested since their gathering on 7/3 (we're pretty sure contagion was that date since it was the only day together), and then he couldn't get tested till 6 days later (with no symptoms), then get the results 5 days afterwards.

That's exactly why this is such a huge problem. So he didn't get his positive test result until 11 days after exposure. Hopefully he was quarantining but how many people could someone come in contact with and infect in 11 days? Hundreds easily.

We have failed so miserably to adequately test people. And now they want to send tens of thousands of students back to school not knowing who does and doesn't have COVID. Because what could possibly go wrong with that?

[disneysteve]

And now they want to send tens of thousands of students back to school not knowing who does and doesn't have COVID. Because what could possibly go wrong with that?

On that note: https://thehill.com/changing-america...ren-tested-are
About 1/3 of children tested in Florida have tested positive. If that isn't concerning enough, there is a lot of concern about long term or even permanent lung damage, even in people with no symptoms. That's downright horrifying.

[QuarterMillionMan]

Another thing I hope people learned from COVID is to stop living pay check to pay check. Valuable lesson to have at least 6 months emergency funds or more 1 year would be ideal.

[rennigade]

Does anyone remember when people on this forum used to discuss financial topics?

I would encourage everyone to turn off the news. Go get some sun, take a walk. Covid-19 wont be the downfall of our society, it will be social media and discussing heated things online. More and more people keep falling into this trap and they dont even realize it.

I leave everyone with this question. When discussing heated topics, how has your life improved by trying to convince others your point of view is right, or debating things online? Have you ever felt better by doing this on a digital platform? There is your answer.