Gencon, Given the recent information about those individuals that have had COVID and recovered (https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/92836), why are you not allowing a positive antibody test to serve as grounds for a bracelet?
There are many medical professionals suggesting to those that have recovered to not get the vaccine due to potential medical implications (see article above), until after they are no longer testing positive for antibodies. And that in many cases the natural immune response is as effective as a vaccine.
additional articles: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/341241/WHO-2019-nCoV-Sci-Brief-Natural-immunity-2021.1-eng.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting-immunity-found-after-recovery-covid-19
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33583018/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33844963/
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00141-3/fulltext "These findings suggest that induced SARS-CoV-2 immunity, whether induced through natural infection or vaccination, is very efficacious against infection (>90%)..."
If a person can show proof of infection, recovery, and antibodies can you reconsider the position on providing bracelets?
I immediately think of the fact that there is no standardized proof that you had and recovered from COVID-19 as a stumbling block no matter what the goal might be otherwise.
This is from the CDC website:
Antibody test results should not be used to determine if someone can return to work. Antibody test results should not be used to group people together in settings such as schools, dormitories, and correctional facilities
Based on that, it sounds like using them to determine if someone should mask up at a (still relatively crowded) convention is not a good idea, especially since the accuracy of the test isn't guaranteed (I can't seem to find any info on specific false positive rates, but apparently a number of factors can affect the accuracy of such a test, including the test's quality).
Speaking of false positives, this was from the FDA's website:
There is also a chance that the positive result is wrong, known as a false positive. False positive tests may occur: Because antibody tests may detect coronaviruses other than SARS-CoV-2, such as those that cause the common cold.
If these tests can be tripped up by the common cold...yeah.
The information above, taken together, tells me that these kinds of tests are probably not going to be tools of choice for determining whether someone needs to mask up at Gen Con, or any gathering.
The current position of the CDC is that there have been no appreciable reinfections after someone has recovered from COVID. Is there any study anywhere that shows different?
CDC Website
Based on that, it sounds like using them to determine if someone should mask up at a (still relatively crowded) convention is not a good idea, especially since the accuracy of the test isn't guaranteed (I can't seem to find any info on specific false positive rates, but apparently a number of factors can affect the accuracy of such a test, including the test's quality). Speaking of false positives, this was from the FDA's website: FDA website
If these tests can be tripped up by the common cold...yeah. The information above, taken together, tells me that these kinds of tests are probably not going to be tools of choice for determining whether someone needs to mask up at Gen Con, or any gathering.
Gen Con has been very clear that they will be following CDC guidelines.
Otherwise, Gen Con gives you the option of not doing so and wearing a mask.
Because this is their policy.
If you have had covid and recovered and its been at least 2 weeks symptom free get the shot and you don't have to worry.
Why? Because some don't like to put an item that is not FDA approved with zero liability toward the manufacturer into their bodies without more time to see long term implications. Which everyone will admit we have no idea about right now. And, although the numbers do show vaccines to be slightly more effective, it's like saying a Ferrari is faster than a Corvette. They will both get you to your destination plenty fast. And that comes from the WHO, not just my opinion. That would be the why.
Approved COVID-19 vaccines provide a high degree of protection against getting seriously ill and dying from the disease, although no vaccine is 100% protective.
https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-vaccines-safety
There are strict protections in place to help ensure the safety of all COVID-19 vaccines. Before receiving validation from WHO and national regulatory agencies, COVID-19 vaccines must undergo rigorous testing in clinical trials to prove that they meet internationally agreed benchmarks for safety and efficacy.
You're free to take it or not, of course, but not taking it has consequences such as having to wear a mask.
Part of it is a risk vs reward equation and understanding efficacy rates. So when they publish that Moderna is 95% effective many assume that means five out of 100 would still get it but that's not true. It means that one is 95% less likely to get something than a non vaxxed person. So in reality, in case studies only .04% of patients that had been vaccinated were infected. That's good news. But then you look at the efficacy rates of natural antibodies and see 88% effective people get cringy but in reality the difference in practical terms is something like a .02% difference in patients catching it.
As a result the question then becomes, do I deal with the potential long term side effects of a vaccine for a .04% defense vs a .06% defense. At some point that answer may be yes but it seems like not much additional bang for the buck.
Sounds like you're cherry-picking your data to match arguments, then falling back on your own beliefs that something must be 100% before you do anything when the data and declarations don't match your goal.
Don't worry, there is no social negative to wearing a mask all convention, which sounds like you will be doing as the least of your available evils.
The argument is moot. Gen Con has stated their policy and it is both simple to follow and understand. You are free to ask for an exception, but I wouldn't count on it being granted. Best to prepare for them to do exactly what they are stating they will do.
1) The vaccines ARE FDA authorized for emergency use. (Most likely, standard approval is imminent. And when that happens, will that change your perspective?) 2) We already know the long term implication of having COVID are far, far worse than any vaccine risks -- which is exactly why the vaccines were fast-tracked.
Without the vaccines, this convention would not be happening. Without the vaccines, this convention would not be happening. No, really, it wouldn't be happening. Think about that when you complain about Gen Con's policies with respect to the vaccine.
But, as njseahawksfan said, this conversation is probably irrelevant. Gen Con has stated their policy. It is what it is. When you go to someone's house, you abide by their rules about smoking, wearing shoes, or whatever. Or you don't come. Same for Gen Con - expect to abide by their rules for vaccines and masks.
Troll Feeding In Progress
Unfortunately we aren’t the European Union or UK, or Canada. So people who recovered cannot be counted according to the CDC.