• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About OSUmetstud

  • Birthday 04/21/1985

Profile Information

  • Four Letter Airport Code For Weather Obs (Such as KDCA)
  • Gender
  • Location:
    St. John's, NL, Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

5,787 profile views
  1. Yeah its interesting. Like I said, Maine has less natural immunity than nearly any other state. People are also interacting more the last month or two than they did before. That's the least vaccinated cohort. So it makes sense you would see most of it there and not in older folks. 16 to 29 38% first dose, 24% fully. If you include kids its 19% first dose, 12% fully. https://www.maine.gov/covid19/vaccines/dashboard
  2. Yeah I think so. The behavior is relaxing at the same time the vaccines are happening and the coverage is lower in the prime spreading population.
  3. I guess we'll see there. Just spitballing Less natural immunity than other areas. Maine has the 4th least cases and deaths per capita Vaccine coverage is excellent in the 65+ population (85%) but 43% in the 16 to 49 population. With little natural immunity the disease can still spread in younger people but with an ever decreasing case fatality rate.
  4. I haven't seen any studies yet that compared post vaccine infection with post infection infection. I'd imagine they're both pretty effective. The main advantage of the vaccine is obviously the lack of mortality and morbidity. If I had to guess, vaccines are better at preventing infection due to the strong antibody response but the natural virus might be better for longevity against variants due to more epitopes from the whole virus.
  5. This is infection risk not symptomatic covid risk. Phase 3 trials looked at the latter. Both natural and vaccine immunity should have greater effectiveness at reducing symptomatic covid, hospitalizations, and deaths, but a smaller effectiveness at reducing infection. There is no comparison here between natural immunity and vaccine immunity in this study.
  6. I think that the CDC has estimated in those studies is that the infected percentage of the oldest cohort is lower...which is advantageous. 65+ is 23% positive. That cohort has high vaccine uptake. The 18 to 49 cohort is 41% positive with lower vaccine uptake....so combined you might get closer to 70 to 80% immunity.
  7. I dont actually believe it's a population issue for this purpose. We're geographically isolated and implemented travel restrictions. Newfoundland literally had no community spread for months. Massachusetts has always had an endemic level of disease since like Feb 2020.
  8. Read the conversation, this whole thing started because people started dunking on Nova Scotia and Canada in general. It's amazing that people who lived in Massachusetts would have the gall to do that.
  9. Wasn't their state travel restrictions early on? We don't have domestic vaccine manufacturing so we had a slower start, but just over 30% have a first dose now. It's much better than many other countries, but not as good as the US, the UK, or Israel. The daily rates lately are similar to the US. I never suggested that what Atlantic Canada did could work there.
  10. I do, I just can't imagine gloating about how Mass has done. You haven't been particularly open and you've had a hell of a lot of death and disease.
  11. Mass has like 25 times the deaths per capita, congrats. And, we've had schools mostly open up here which is a big advantage of downstream costs to the American experience.
  12. Yeah I agree. It's worked here. We've only had 6 deaths in NL, for example. Were up to about 30% vaccinated with the first dose, so there's a solid opportunity cost advantage in preventing infections and deaths this spring as we vaccinate.
  13. They've been running a mostly zerocovid policy, like here. We've had success due to the travel restrictions in Atlantic Canada.
  14. I thought we were talking in general. Idk, I think the suggested guidance on vaccinated people trends too safe. The Court held that "in every well ordered society charged with the duty of conserving the safety of its members the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand" and that "[r]eal liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person to use his own [liberty], whether in respect of his person or his property, regardless of the injury that may be done to others." Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905)
  15. There's plenty of relevant case law for public health restrictions in pandemics going back over 100 years. I understand it sucks.