4th and 5

TEXAS!!! from the 666

Go to a UTEP football game with a local gal and get a handjob

Get the damn vaccine. It’s that simple. I just bachelor partied for 3 days in Vegas. Hopefully my third shot a few weeks ago allowed me to run between the raindrops. Not sick yet.

Man y’all are doing it the hard way put line and leader together, parallel, overlapping about 8 inches make a granny knot (a simple loop) with the two lines where they overlap run the leader and line thru the loop 4 times pull line and leader tight to form the knot trim tag ends start casting

Put this poster on the list with “The Whistler”

note this SWA promo Here is how to receive your Promotional Companion Pass: Register and purchase a round trip or two one-way flights by 9/9 Travel by 11/18 Companion flies free*Does not include taxes and fees from $5.60 one-way. Limited time. Restrictions apply. with you 1/6/2022 – 2/28/2022

The best song The best performance The best rrecording By the best there ever was and the best there will ever be put this on and crank it in your car or home stereo, not on your computer, it’ll hit you in the feels

Note there are reduced recoil defensive loads from Hornady, Federal, etc., you might want to have the woman in your life get started with those

the oldest trick in the book, I did that with a friend the first time he shot a handgun

get the Dan Wesson Valor, save some bucks and you'll be quite pleased

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7794597/ In a multiple linear regression, significant predictors of vaccination intent were general vaccine knowledge (β = 0.311, p < .001), rejection of vaccine conspiracies (β = −0.117, p = .003), perceived severity of COVID-19 (β = 0.273, p < .001), influenza vaccine uptake (β = 0.178, p < .001), having ≥ 5 pre-existing conditions (β = 0.098, p = .003), being male (β = 0.119, p < .001), household income of ≥ $120,000 (β = 0.110, p = .004), identifying as a Democrat (β = 0.075, p < .029), and not relying upon social media for virus information (β = -0.090, p 〈0 0 2). Intent to vaccinate was lower for Fox News (57.3%) than CNN/MSNBC viewers (76.4%) (χ2 (1) = 12.68, p < .001). Political party differences in threat appraisals and vaccine conspiracy beliefs are described.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2109072 no surprise here, another case made for a booster Abstract BACKGROUND Despite the high efficacy of the BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), rare breakthrough infections have been reported, including infections among health care workers. Data are needed to characterize these infections and define correlates of breakthrough and infectivity. METHODS At the largest medical center in Israel, we identified breakthrough infections by performing extensive evaluations of health care workers who were symptomatic (including mild symptoms) or had known infection exposure. These evaluations included epidemiologic investigations, repeat reverse-transcriptase–polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) assays, antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic testing (Ag-RDT), serologic assays, and genomic sequencing. Correlates of breakthrough infection were assessed in a case–control analysis. We matched patients with breakthrough infection who had antibody titers obtained within a week before SARS-CoV-2 detection (peri-infection period) with four to five uninfected controls and used generalized estimating equations to predict the geometric mean titers among cases and controls and the ratio between the titers in the two groups. We also assessed the correlation between neutralizing antibody titers and N gene cycle threshold (Ct) values with respect to infectivity. RESULTS Among 1497 fully vaccinated health care workers for whom RT-PCR data were available, 39 SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections were documented. Neutralizing antibody titers in case patients during the peri-infection period were lower than those in matched uninfected controls (case-to-control ratio, 0.361; 95% confidence interval, 0.165 to 0.787). Higher peri-infection neutralizing antibody titers were associated with lower infectivity (higher Ct values). Most breakthrough cases were mild or asymptomatic, although 19% had persistent symptoms (>6 weeks). The B.1.1.7 (alpha) variant was found in 85% of samples tested. A total of 74% of case patients had a high viral load (Ct value, <30) at some point during their infection; however, of these patients, only 17 (59%) had a positive result on concurrent Ag-RDT. No secondary infections were documented. CONCLUSIONS Among fully vaccinated health care workers, the occurrence of breakthrough infections with SARS-CoV-2 was correlated with neutralizing antibody titers during the peri-infection period. Most breakthrough infections were mild or asymptomatic, although persistent symptoms did occur. Since its rollout in late 2020 in Israel, the BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech) has been highly effective in preventing clinically significant coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).1-3 The vaccine has also been shown to reduce the incidence of asymptomatic infection and the associated infectivity.4,5 However, breakthrough infections have emerged in a small percentage of vaccine recipients, a phenomenon that has been described in other countries and health care institutions.6-8 To date, no correlate of protection from breakthrough infection has been reported.9 At the Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan, we conducted a prospective cohort study to assess the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine among health care workers and to examine possible correlates of protection and infectivity in this population. Methods STUDY SETTING Sheba Medical Center is the largest medical center in Israel and is staffed by 12,586 health care workers, including employees, students, and volunteers. From December 19, 2020, to April 28, 2021, a total of 91% of the center personnel received two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. This period was followed by a rapid decrease in newly detected cases.4,10 Simultaneously, efforts were extended to identify new cases with the use of daily health questionnaires, a telephone hotline, extensive epidemiologic investigations of exposure events, and contact tracing of infected patients and personnel. Testing for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 by means of reverse-transcriptase–polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) assay remained readily available for fully vaccinated staff members who were symptomatic or had been exposed to an infected person, regardless of symptoms. Antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic testing (Ag-RDT) was available as an initial screening tool in the personnel clinic in combination with RT-PCR testing. The study was approved by the institutional review board at Sheba Medical Center. STUDY DESIGN AND POPULATION On January 20, 2021, we initiated the study among health care workers at Sheba Medical Center, 11 days after the first staff members had received a second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Data were collected for 14 weeks, until April 28. Concurrently, the third and largest Covid-19 pandemic surge emerged in Israel and reached its peak on January 14, 2021, with reports of an average of 8424 daily cases.Cases and Controls in Study Design. The study goal was to identify every breakthrough infection, including asymptomatic infections, that occurred during the study period among the health care workers at the center. A breakthrough infection was defined as the detection of SARS-CoV-2 on RT-PCR assay performed 11 or more days after receipt of a second dose of BNT162b2 if no explicit exposure or symptoms had been reported during the first 6 days. In this study, we characterized all breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated health care workers and conducted a matched case–control analysis to identify possible correlates of breakthrough infection. For the case–control analysis, we selected control serum samples that had been obtained during a prospective cohort study to analyze vaccine-induced immune responses and dynamics at the Sheba Medical Center.11 (Details regarding the serologic study are provided in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.) Among the health care workers who had participated in the serologic study, those who had results of neutralizing antibody testing and complete data were eligible as a basis for selecting controls (Figure 1). For each breakthrough case, we matched samples that had been obtained from four or five uninfected controls according to the following variables: sex, age, the interval between the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccine and serologic testing, and immunosuppression status. We compared neutralizing antibody titers obtained within a week before SARS-CoV-2 detection on RT-PCR testing, including the day of diagnosis (peri-infection period); peak neutralizing antibody titers obtained during the initial postvaccination period; and S-specific IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 obtained at both time points. Breakthrough cases for which serologic samples were not available were excluded from this analysis. DATA AND SAMPLE COLLECTION All health care workers with breakthrough infection were immediately contacted, and an epidemiologic investigation was conducted by the hospital Infection Prevention and Control Unit. All health care workers with positive test results were requested to undergo several additional tests, including viral genome sequencing, repeat RT-PCR testing, Ag-RDT, and SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing. Testing for the presence of neutralizing and anti-S IgG antibodies was performed on the day of detection of infection unless the health care worker had participated in the Sheba serologic study,11 and these results were available from the week preceding detection. After recovery from infection, all health care workers were asked to provide a second blood sample for the measurement of N-specific IgG antibodies. In line with hospital protocol for the detection of secondary infections, close in-hospital contacts of infected health care workers were asked to undergo RT-PCR testing 5 days after their last known exposure. Infected persons were also urged to advise their household members and other close community contacts to undergo RT-PCR testing. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected by trained personnel, and RT-PCR testing was performed with the use of the Allplex 2019-nCoV assay (Seegene), with findings expressed as the cycle threshold (Ct) for the gene encoding the nucleocapsid protein (N gene). A Ct value of less than 30, which indicated an increased viral load, was used to determine infectivity.12,13 We performed Ag-RDT using the NowCheck COVID-19 Ag test (Bionote). To identify variants of concern, we performed multiplex real-time one-step RT-PCR assays to detect mutations in the spike (S) protein (E484K, N501Y, and HV69/70). To verify the results of this testing, whole-genome sequencing was performed with the use of the COVIDSeq library preparation kit (Illumina), as described previously.14 We used three different measures to assess antibody-mediated immune responses: serologic testing for S1 IgG antibodies (Beckman Coulter), SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization assay,15 and Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassay (Roche) to test for anti-N antigen. We assessed two outcome measures — neutralizing antibodies and IgG antibodies — and obtained titers at two time points: the peri-infection period (within 1 week before infection) and the peak period (within the first month after the second dose of vaccine). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS For the case–control analyses, we included data from all breakthrough case patients for whom peri-infection neutralizing antibody titers were available. A case–control ratio of 1:4 or 1:5 was selected to maximize the statistical power of the study. We matched the control samples with the case samples using the algorithm that is described in detail in the text and in Figure S1 in the Supplementary Appendix. On the basis of this algorithm, we first performed case–control matching according to the interval between the second vaccine dose and serologic testing, followed by categorization according to sex, age, and immunosuppression status. If this pool yielded more than five controls, we selected five at random. For a single case patient with immunosuppression, only three of four controls were sex-matched. In an additional subgroup analysis, we excluded three asymptomatic case patients with borderline results (repeat Ct, >35). To further confirm the robustness of our matching criteria, we performed a sensitivity analysis with a different order of covariates in the matching algorithm that used a uniform age criterion and did not match for sex. (Details regarding the sensitivity analysis are provided in the Supplementary Appendix.) To measure the antibody-mediated immune response, we compared log-transformed antibody titers between cases and matched controls using a generalized estimating equation (GEE) with the group assignment (case or control) used as the predictor. For the analyses of the full cohort and the subgroup that excluded the borderline cases, we report the observed geometric mean titer (GMT) and its 95% confidence interval, the GMT predicted by the GEE model, and the ratio of cases to controls (the GMT of the cases divided by the GMT of the controls). To assess the correlation between the lowest Ct value and the neutralizing antibody level during the peri-infection period, we applied a linear regression model to estimate the slope of the regression line and its 95% confidence interval. We used the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test to compare demographic and clinical characteristics of the case patients who were included in the case–control study with those for whom peri-infection results of neutralizing antibody testing were not available. Results BREAKTHROUGH INFECTIONS Among 11,453 fully vaccinated health care workers, 1497 (13.1%) underwent RT-PCR testing during the study period. Of the tested workers, 39 breakthrough cases were detected. More than 38 persons were tested for every positive case that was detected, for a test positivity of 2.6%. Thus, this percentage was much lower than the test positivity rate in Israel at the time, since the ratio between positive results and the extensive number of tests that were administered in our study was much smaller than that in the national population. Of the 39 breakthrough case patients, 18 (46%) were nursing staff members, 10 (26%) were administration or maintenance workers, 6 (15%) were allied health professionals, and 5 (13%) were physicians. The average age of the 39 infected workers was 42 years, and the majority were women (64%). The median interval from the second vaccine dose to SARS-CoV-2 detection was 39 days (range, 11 to 102). Only one infected person (3%) had immunosuppression. Other coexisting illnesses are detailed in Table S1. In all 37 case patients for whom data were available regarding the source of infection, the suspected source was an unvaccinated person; in 21 patients (57%), this person was a household member. Among these case patients were two married couples, in which both sets of spouses worked at Sheba Medical Center and had an unvaccinated child who had tested positive for Covid-19 and was assumed to be the source. In 11 of 37 case patients (30%), the suspected source was an unvaccinated fellow health care worker or patient; in 7 of the 11 case patients, the infection was caused by a nosocomial outbreak of the B.1.1.7 (alpha) variant. These 7 patients, who worked in different hospital sectors and wards, were all found to be linked to the same suspected unvaccinated index patient who had been receiving noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation before her infection had been detected. Of the 39 cases of infection, 27 occurred in workers who were tested solely because of exposure to a person with known SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of all the workers with breakthrough infection, 26 (67%) had mild symptoms at some stage, and none required hospitalization. The remaining 13 workers (33% of all cases) were asymptomatic during the duration of infection; of these workers, 6 were defined as borderline cases, since they had an N gene Ct value of more than 35 on repeat testing. The most common symptom that was reported was upper respiratory congestion (36% of all cases), followed by myalgia (28%) and loss of smell or taste (28%); fever or rigors were reported in 21% (Table S1). On follow-up questioning, 31% of all infected workers reported having residual symptoms 14 days after their diagnosis. At 6 weeks after their diagnosis, 19% reported having “long Covid-19” symptoms, which included a prolonged loss of smell, persistent cough, fatigue, weakness, dyspnea, or myalgia. Nine workers (23%) took a leave of absence from work beyond the 10 days of required quarantine; of these workers, 4 returned to work within 2 weeks. One worker had not yet returned after 6 weeks. VERIFICATION TESTING AND SECONDARY INFECTIONS Repeat RT-PCR assays were performed on samples obtained from most of the infected workers and for all case patients with an initial N gene Ct value of more than 30 to verify that the initial test was not taken too early, before the worker had become infectious. A total of 29 case patients (74%) had a Ct value of less than 30 at some point during their infection. However, of these workers, only 17 (59%) had positive results on a concurrent Ag-RDT. Ten workers (26%) had an N gene Ct value of more than 30 throughout the entire period; 6 of these workers had values of more than 35 and probably had never been infectious. Of the 33 isolates that were tested for a variant of concern, 28 (85%) were identified as the B.1.1.7 variant, by either multiplex PCR assay or genomic sequencing. At the time of this study, the B.1.1.7 variant was the most widespread variant in Israel and accounted for up to 94.5% of SARS-CoV-2 isolates.1,16 Since the end of the study, the country has had a surge of cases caused by the delta variant, as have many other countries worldwide. Thorough epidemiologic investigations of data regarding in-hospital contact tracing did not detect any cases of transmission from infected health care workers (secondary infections) among the 39 primary infections. Among the 31 cases for whom data regarding household transmission (including symptoms and RT-PCR results) were available, no secondary infections were detected, including 10 case patients and their 27 household members in whom the health care worker was the only index case patient. Data regarding postinfection N-specific IgG antibodies were available for 22 of 39 case patients (56%) on days 8 to 72 after the first positive result on RT-PCR assay. Of these workers, 4 (18%) did not have an immune response, as detected by negative results on N-specific IgG antibody testing. Among these 4 workers were 2 who were asymptomatic (Ct values, 32 and 35), 1 who underwent serologic testing only on day 10 after diagnosis, and 1 who had immunosuppression. CASE–CONTROL ANALYSIS The results of peri-infection neutralizing antibody tests were available for 22 breakthrough cases. Included in this group were 3 health care workers who had participated in the serologic study and had a test performed in the week preceding detection; in 19 other workers, neutralizing and S-specific IgG antibodies were assessed on detection day. Of these 19 case patients, 12 were asymptomatic at the time of detection. For each case, 4 to 5 controls were matched as described (Fig. S1). In total, 22 breakthrough cases and their 104 matched controls were included in the case–control analysis. The predicted GMT of peri-infection neutralizing antibody titers was 192.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 67.6 to 549.8) for cases and 533.7 (95% CI, 408.1 to 698.0) for controls, for a predicted case-to-control ratio of neutralizing antibody titers of 0.361 (95% CI, 0.165 to 0.787) (Table 1 and Figure 2A). In a subgroup analysis in which the borderline cases were excluded, the ratio was 0.353 (95% CI, 0.185 to 0.674). Peri-infection neutralizing antibody titers in the breakthrough cases were associated with higher N gene Ct values (i.e., a lower viral RNA copy number) (slope of regression line, 171.2; 95% CI, 62.9 to 279.4) (Figure 3). A peak neutralizing antibody titer within the first month after the second vaccine dose was available for only 12 of the breakthrough cases; the GEE predicted peak neutralizing antibody titer was 152.2 (95% CI, 30.5 to 759.3) in 12 cases and 1027.5 (95% CI, 761.6 to 1386.2) in 56 controls, for a ratio of 0.148 (95% CI, 0.040 to 0.548) (Figure 2B). In the subgroup analysis in which borderline cases were excluded, the ratio was 0.114 (95% CI, 0.042 to 0.309). The observed and predicted GMTs of peri-infection S-specific IgG antibody levels in breakthrough infection cases were lower than that in controls, with a predicted ratio of 0.514 (95% CI, 0.282 to 0.937) (Figure 2C). The observed and predicted peak IgG GMTs in cases were also somewhat lower than those in controls (0.507; 95% CI, 0.260 to 0.989) (Figure 2D). To assess whether our practice of measuring antibodies on the day of diagnosis created bias by capturing anamnestic responses to the current infection, we plotted peak (first-month) IgG titers against peri-infection titers on the day of diagnosis in 13 case patients for whom both values were available. In all cases, peri-infection titers were lower than the previous peak titers, indicating that the titers that were obtained on the day of diagnosis were probably representative of peri-infection titers (Fig. S2). Discussion In this study, we characterized all Covid-19 breakthrough infections among 39 fully vaccinated health care workers during the 4-month period after the second vaccine dose and compared the peri-infection humoral response in these workers with the response in matched controls. We found a low rate of breakthrough infection (0.4%). Among the 39 workers who tested positive for Covid-19, most had few symptoms, yet 19% had long Covid-19 symptoms (>6 weeks). Most of the infected health care workers had N gene Ct values that suggested they had been infectious at some point. These workers included some who had been asymptomatic and thus who had infections that would not have been detected without the rigorous screening that followed any minor known exposure. This factor suggests that at least in some cases, the vaccine protected against symptomatic disease but not against infection. However, no secondary infections were traced back to any of the breakthrough cases, which supports the inference that these workers were less contagious than unvaccinated persons, as has been reported previously.4,5,17,18 Mandated isolation after positive results on RT-PCR assay regardless of vaccination status could have contributed to this observation. Most important, we found that low titers of neutralizing antibody and S-specific IgG antibody may serve as markers of breakthrough infection. Identifying immune correlates of protection (or lack thereof) from SARS-CoV-2 is critical to predicting how the expected antibody decay will affect clinical outcomes, if and when a booster dose will be needed, and whether vaccinated persons are protected. Such capacity for prediction is particularly important for new vaccine development. The assumption that the presence of neutralizing antibodies would correlate with protection from reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 has been supported by studies comparing the incidence of infection between seropositive and seronegative persons.9,19 Recently, Khoury et al.20 and Earle et al.21 determined that the neutralization level is highly predictive of immune protection in comparing population values from vaccine efficacy and immunogenicity trials. Here, we report data on persons in a vaccinated population that support this correlate of protection. Neutralizing antibody titers are typically not readily available, and a more practical immune correlate of protection is required, such as the anti-S IgG titer. We and others have previously found a significant correlation between neutralizing antibody titers and anti-S or anti–receptor binding domain IgG antibody titers.11,22 In this study, the correlation between levels of neutralizing antibodies and breakthrough infections was stronger than that for IgG antibodies. We found that the difference in the peak titers of neutralizing and IgG antibodies between cases and controls was more strongly associated with the risk of infection than the difference in the peri-infection titers. This finding was consistent with the hypothesis that the neutralizing antibody titer after vaccination is a marker of overall immune response and suggested a possible role for the IgG titer. Thus, a decrease in the titer of either of these antibodies (rather than in the peak titer) may not accurately predict a decrease in protection. Moreover, we found that the peri-infection neutralizing antibody titers correlated with the viral load and thus with the infectivity of breakthrough cases. This result may eventually be even more important, since vaccine-induced immunity has been shown to be greatly protective against clinical disease but somewhat less protective against both infection and infectivity.4 Yet in this relatively small cohort, we could not determine a specific protective titer for either serologic measure that was tested. Furthermore, our cohort included health care workers who were mostly young and healthy, and all breakthrough cases were mild. We have previously reported that 95% of vaccinated health care workers were found to have a neutralizing antibody titer of more than 256 within 2 weeks after the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose.11 However, it remains to be determined whether the decay of serum antibody levels is a good indicator for the timing of booster administration. The degree of protection may depend more on the initial immune response than on the decay of antibody levels, since memory cells are expected to respond to future exposures. Our results suggest that the peak antibody titers also correlated with protection, despite the low number of cases in our study. We identified the B.1.1.7 variant in 85% of cases, similar to its prevalence in the community.1,16 This finding is in line with reports from California, New York, and Massachusetts23-25 showing that the distribution of variants of concern in breakthrough infections was similar to that in the general unvaccinated population. These findings suggest that breakthrough isolates do not reflect selection pressure toward particular immunity-evading variants. In contrast, reports in which certain variants of concern were more prevalent in breakthrough infections have been published as well.8,16,26 Our study was not designed to address this question regarding variants of concern in breakthrough infections. Our study has several limitations. First, even though we provide extensive documentation of a cohort of breakthrough infections, the numbers of cases were relatively small. Second, this cohort represents mostly young and healthy persons, and all breakthrough infections were mild and did not require hospitalization. Thus, we could not determine the correlate of protection from severe infection or infection in vulnerable populations of older persons with coexisting illnesses. Third, we may have missed asymptomatic cases despite the intensive effort to test all exposed health care workers, since we did not conduct surveillance testing. Fourth, the controls were not matched according to testing or exposure but only according to the timing of serologic testing in vaccinated, uninfected health care workers. Thus, we could not control for differences in the risk of exposure to Covid-19. This factor may have led to an underestimation of the difference in protection between cases and controls. Finally, in many case patients, the peri-infection antibody titer that was available had been obtained on the day of detection of the infection (which in some cases could have been a few days into the infection period) and therefore was possibly already elevated because of the infection. However, since most cases were detected in the presymptomatic stage, we expect that such contamination of results was minor. Moreover, we found that among the case patients in whom both peri-infection and earlier neutralizing antibody results were available, the majority of titers were lower during the peri-infection period than during the earlier period, which also suggests that this contamination was negligible. If such contamination were substantial, the result would likely be biased toward the null hypothesis of no relationship between antibody titers and breakthrough infection. In this study, we found that although the BNT162b2 vaccine is extremely effective, rare breakthrough infections carry an infectious potential and create a special challenge, since such infections are often asymptomatic and may pose a risk to vulnerable populations.

I spent 30 seconds on google and determined Dr. Robert Malone is not the inventor of the mRNA vaccine.

Yeah if only there were some way to avoid all this....

That, but I'd add the regular size superspook, white with red head, 30 pound leader, first gut first light, then move to the second. Cast into the current. Look for bird/bait action or birds sitting on the beach. And choose a light rod you can cast repeatedly, not a surf rod. Spinning reel with Power Pro superslick. Wading belt, stringer, set of pliers.

Yes, the mistake of fact defense applies when the defendant’s mistaken belief, if accepted as true, negates the culpable mental state for the crime charged. For instance, in a theft case the culpable mental state is intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. If you took an umbrella, thinking it was your umbrella, but it in fact was not, the mistake of fact (ownership of umbrella) negates the required intent (permanently deprive the owner of the property). The confusion (and really the blur between the two defenses) comes from the fact that one can be mistaken about facts, and use force, or deadly force, and be justified under Ch. 9 of the Penal Code. Use of force, or deadly force, does not require one to be right, just reasonable. There was clearly a mistake of fact in this case. Not one that negates the culpable mental state of the crime charged, but one that is relevant to use of force or deadly force to protect self or property. Was her belief, although mistaken, still reasonable? The jury answered that question. Her attorneys did a bad job. This case should have been a not guilty.

Because the data suggests a third dose is wise, because the shit is about to hit the fan with delta, because my jobs require me to interact with lots of young people who generally make poor decisions and/or think they are bulletproof, because I'm deathly scared of covid, because the vaccine is safe, because I love my wife and kids, because it is the right thing to do for everyone else too, because I want to take another "I told you so" victory lap for my anti-vax friends to see, because I refuse to let Greg Abbott kill me, etc.

Update: I got Pfizer #3 on Wednesday. #2 was mid March. No issues other than soreness at the injection site for a few days.

Done it with a lot bigger than that, regretted it every time. Wanna smell my left hand?

Barehanded this bad bitch crossing the street on the way to work this morning. Bout 5 feet and not a fan of selfies

really?

your doctor is not going to recommend a third shot at this time recommending = liability not recommending = no liability for covid, long haul or death but doctors (with no P-P relationship) and scientists and public health authorities for countries are, and that's good enough for me

https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=262134 By Ernie Mundell and Robin Foster HealthDay Reporters FRIDAY, July 30, 2021 A new internal government document claims the Delta variant appears to cause more severe illness than earlier coronavirus variants and spreads as easily as chickenpox. In laying out the evidence that this variant looks like the most dangerous one yet, the document urges health officials to "acknowledge the war has changed," the Washington Post reported. Shared with officials from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the document reveals that the agency knows it must revamp its public messaging to emphasize vaccination as the best defense against a variant so contagious that it acts almost like a different novel virus, spreading faster than Ebola or the common cold, the Post reported. It cites a combination of recently obtained, unpublished data from outbreak investigations and outside studies showing that vaccinated individuals infected with the Delta variant may be able to transmit the virus as easily as those who are unvaccinated. Vaccinated people infected with Delta have viral loads similar to those who are unvaccinated and infected with the variant, the Post reported. "I finished reading it significantly more concerned than when I began," Robert Wachter, chairman of the department of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, told the Post. CDC scientists were so alarmed that the agency changed masking guidance for vaccinated people earlier this week, even before making the new data public, the newspaper said. The data cited in the document prompted revamped recommendations that call for the fully vaccinated to wear masks indoors in public settings in certain circumstances, a federal health official told the Post, adding that the full data will be published on Friday. Some of the data suggests there is a higher risk among older people for hospitalization and death, regardless of vaccination status. Other evidence estimates there are 35,000 symptomatic infections per week among 162 million vaccinated Americans, the Post reported. "Although it's rare, we believe that at an individual level, vaccinated people may spread the virus, which is why we updated our recommendation," the federal health official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told the Post. "Waiting even days to publish the data could result in needless suffering and, as public health professionals, we cannot accept that." The document also includes CDC data showing that the vaccines are not as effective in immunocompromised patients and nursing home residents, raising the possibility that the vulnerable will need a booster dose. Walter Orenstein, associate director of the Emory Vaccine Center in Atlanta, said he was struck by data showing that vaccinated people who became infected with Delta shed just as much virus as those who were not vaccinated. "I think this is very important in changing things," Orenstein said. A person working with the CDC on the Delta variant, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said genetic data that came from a July 4 outbreak in Provincetown, Mass., showed vaccinated people were transmitting the virus to other vaccinated people. The person said the data was "deeply disconcerting" and a "canary in the coal mine" for scientists. "I think the central issue is that vaccinated people are probably involved to a substantial extent in the transmission of Delta," Jeffrey Shaman, a Columbia University epidemiologist, told the Post. "In some sense, vaccination is now about personal protection — protecting oneself against severe disease. Herd immunity is not relevant as we are seeing plenty of evidence of repeat and breakthrough infections." The document confirms that it is time to change how people think about the pandemic, experts said. "We really need to shift toward a goal of preventing serious disease and disability and medical consequences, and not worry about every virus detected in somebody's nose," Kathleen Neuzil, a vaccine expert at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, told the Post. "It's hard to do, but I think we have to become comfortable with coronavirus not going away." Biden announces 'vaccine or testing' mandate for federal employees President Joe Biden announced Thursday that all civilian federal employees will have to be vaccinated or submit to regular testing, masking and travel restrictions. "This is an American tragedy," Biden said in a speech from the White House. "People are dying, and will die, who don't have to die." The move mirrors an announcement on Wednesday from New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who said that tens of thousands of state employees would be required to show proof of vaccination or submit to weekly testing, The New York Times reported. Cuomo also said that "patient-facing" health care workers at state hospitals must be vaccinated to stay employed. Two days earlier, New York City announced that all 300,000 municipal employees must be vaccinated or submit to weekly testing. Biden's plan will only force employees to get a shot or lose their job if they work with patients at hospitals run by the Veterans Affairs department. But public health officials hope the prospect of extra burdens for the unvaccinated will help convince more people to get immunized, the Times reported. Hours after Biden's announcement, the Pentagon said that it would require military personnel to attest to their vaccination status or face frequent testing and other restrictions, the Times reported. In his speech, Biden had called upon the Department of Defense to move rapidly toward requiring coronavirus vaccines for all members of the military, a step that would affect almost 1.5 million troops. Many of those troops have resisted vaccination. But Biden stopped short of saying he would issue a waiver to compel service members to get vaccines not yet fully approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The lack of full approval hasn't stopped mayors, chief executives, hospital administrators and college presidents around the country from requiring vaccinations. In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Monday that the state's 246,000 employees would have to be vaccinated by Aug. 2 or would be tested at least once a week. With the high contagious Delta variant threatening a surge of cases in the fall, Biden must walk a tightrope when setting national vaccine policies. "You want to be careful," Dr. Marcus Plescia, chief medical officer of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, told the Times. "You don't want to put wind in the sails of the anti-vax movement." But Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, told the Times that Biden should mandate vaccines to the degree that he can, among federal employees and the military. "Sure, it will cause a backlash -- so what?" Offit said. "It isn't a personal choice. It's a choice for others. It's not an American's right to potentially catch and spread a fatal infection." In the last six months, nearly half of the country -- 163.3 million people -- has been vaccinated, including 80 percent of those 65 and older, data from the U.S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows. But tens of millions of people remain unprotected against what CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky has described as one of the most contagious respiratory diseases known to scientists. Experts say a refusal to get vaccinated puts others at risk — especially those who cannot get shots for medical reasons, or whose immune systems are too weak to respond to the vaccine. "The ongoing transmission of this virus is in fact largely due to the unvaccinated," Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, told the Times.

looking for a HD model on the "big girls who swallow" thread.....I gotta say, the user name checks out!