Latest: Help. My neighbor I look after just came to me, "I've been exposed to Covid, can you ...

[marble falls]

Last edited Mon Aug 9, 2021, 01:39 AM - Edit history (3)

... take me to the hospital for a test."

He's been vaxxed.

Do I do it?

This is not a test.


I went and bought the test. I did the swabbing. He tested positive. I drove him to the hospital. On the ride, he told me he hasn't gotten vaxxed yet. They took him in and told me I had to leave the hospital.


I jumped into the shower taking off my clothes and putting them into the washer.

I will get a covid test. I will loathe 45 with my last breath.

About my neighbor: he has Huntington's. He has no visitors. He got a call from the local bus service: he was exposed to a confirmed Covid case on the bus last week. He was going to the gym.

My wife is none too pleased. I tried to explain, I tried to do what I know someone would do for me. I try to live as a christian.

Sunday Aug 8 - My neighbor was given an infusion that means he doesn't need the vaccine he allowed me to believe he had had, but hadn't.

My wife made the mistake of going to church for the first time in a year and a half two weeks ago to say good bye to a retiring music director - and both the director and her husband and the 90-year-old lady sitting next to wife are infected. The husband is intubated this week.

So far, my wife's doing fine. Today, I very suddenly got extremely ill, like a freight train flu hit me.

I checked in with VA and instead of driving 80 miles to Temple, we got sent to the Baylor-Scott and White in Marble Falls.

All beds are full. There was an 8-9 hr wait just for triage.

I called my wife to pick me up after an hour and a half, I had felt fine by this time.

We are testing ourselves tomorrow, and tightly quarantining either way. If I test positive, I will go to VA/Temple.

I loathe my governor, my Senators, my Congressman and every single asshole who refuses to vax, mask, and stay the fuck home for a month.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

1. Why wouldn't you?

[marble falls]

3. Exposing my wife is a consideration. We're in our 70's, I'm still fight cancer. We take care of ...

... of my 94 year old MiL.

[LisaL]

21. You are very high risk.

NT

[LisaL]

11. Hah?

Potentially infectious covid person in the same car.

[USALiberal]

47. Really, you do not know why he might not want to?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

82. Until he posted the risk factors, no, I did not.

[marble falls]

85. For the record: I trully appreciate your pushing at the boundries. It helps keep ...

... us old lefties honest to our beliefs. Thanks, brother.

[lark]

2. Yes but you should both wear masks, windows in car open, neighbor in back.

Cleansing when done.

I'm assuming you are fully vaccinated as well.

[Faux pas]

9. YES!

That's how I'd do it.

[LisaL]

16. It's a highly infectious respiratory disease.

Regular cloth masks won't do. You need an N95 and you need for it to fit properly with no leaks.

[lark]

23. Really, getting the home test for him would be far safer.

Upon further thought, this is how I'd handle it - go get the kit for him.

[LisaL]

26. For sure.

And if he is symptomatic, he should call paramedics.

[we can do it]

37. Paramedics are for emergencies.

[LisaL]

38. Elder with covid is an emergency.

NT

[we can do it]

50. An exposure is not an emergency and a waste of resources.

Breathing difficulty, shortness of breathe- emergency. Asymptomatic Covid - not an emergency.

[LisaL]

107. The neighbor is not asymptomatic as far as I can tell, since OP took him to the hospital and

hospital accepted him.

[Renew Deal]

146. Good philasophical questions. I think if he tests positive, has symptons, and no ride, an ambulance

is appropriate. Some areas have non-911 options. Either way, a neighbor can't be expected to expose themselves to a deadly disease when they know the person is positive.

[LisaL]

148. OP already knew neighbor was positive before giving him a ride.

I really don't think that was a good idea.

[blogslug]

4. Walmart, Walgreen's and CVS all sell home tests in-store

If you feel strange taking to your neighbor to the hospital, maybe you could go pick one up?

[marble falls]

5. Good answer!

[Hugin]

20. You could even potentially have one delivered to their address. n/t

[Hugin]

17. There's the ticket!

Good plan.

[mackdaddy]

191. My local Library gives out the antibody blood test kits for free.

You just call them up and the give them to you at the curb side.

Even if you are fully vaccinated, being exposed you should test yourself. You can be asymptomatic and still have it in your respiratory system and pass it on to others. Especially the Delta variant.

The talk show host Randi Rhodes is fully vaxxed, but was tested positive and asymptomatic and has to quarantine for 14 days to not pass it on.

[malaise]

6. Call an ambulance

No - do not expose your family

[Renew Deal]

18. For a test?

This isn’t an emergency.

[LisaL]

30. Depends on whether the neighbor is having symptoms or not.

NT

[Deminpenn]

31. You might be able to get van service from your ambulance provider

at least that's the way it works for our ambulance companies. The van takes patients to/from doctor's appts and hospital.

[SheltieLover]

40. +1,000!

[Rustyeye77]

7. Not that it matters but does he have any symptoms ?

[FakeNoose]

63. Yes that's the first question

The neighbor has been exposed, but not feeling any symptoms yet. (?)

If no symptoms, then it's probably safe to take the person to the hospital or pharmacy for a test, provided both are wearing masks and the car windows stay open at all times. No air conditioner.

For myself, I'd be sure to wipe down the insides of my car with a good antibiotic cleaner (or wipes). But if my friend asked for help I wouldn't refuse, I'd just be very careful.

[brush]

8. What about Uber or Lyft?

[MrsCoffee]

45. I would hope someone possibly exposed to covid is not out ubering around.

That’s a great way to spread it.

[brush]

49. Masks are required by both companies for driver and riders...

And the riders sit in the back. It would be the same if his neighbor took him to the hospital. Both, hopefully would wear masks with the riders in the back.

Apparently you've never used either Uber or Lyft. They didn't go out of business during the pandemic.

I've used Uber several times over the past year and haven't been victim to covid "being spread around" as you put it. Again, it's a car with a driver and passengers, all masked and distanced apart.

[MrsCoffee]

55. I wouldn't use any kind of public transportation that might expose others if I thought I had been

exposed. I hear the Delta variant is super contagious. I’d call my doctor and follow advice. Most likely order a home test.

Not talking about taking a trip to the store or work on a normal day here.

Too bad Uber hasn’t gone out of business by the way. They are a horrible company.

[brush]

57. You're uninformed. As I said, masks and distancing are required.

See post 2.

[MrsCoffee]

61. Then why are people told to quarantine for two weeks if they suspect being exposed?

I’m not the one uninformed.

[brush]

69. Anyone driving rideshares without being masked and fully vaccinated...

would be foolish. CNN just today had a doctor on who cited that fully vaccinated people are 99.999 percent protected from contracting the virus and having to be hospitalized.

Get informed. Don't fall for the right wing media hype and exaggeration. Again, fully vaccinated people are 99.99 percent protected. I have CNN on right now and that figure was just stated again.

And then there is this: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215689930

[MrsCoffee]

71. If you suspect you have been infected, quarantine. Don't go out and jeopardize others.

That's hardly fucking right wing media hype or exaggeration.

But you do you.

[brush]

73. Again, if you're fully vaccinated and masked you're 99.999 percent...

protected from a breakthrough infection. We we're talking about Uber and Lyft drivers taking the guy to the hospital.

Any of them I'm pretty sure are smart enough to protect themselves by getting fully vaccinated, masking up and requiring passengers to be masked up. I'll take 99.999 percent protected any day.

[LisaL]

104. 99,99?

Are you for real?
Even in clinical trials those kind of results were not achieved.

[Treefrog]

128. Thank you.

That’s the post I was looking for.

[brush]

158. Read this carefully. CNN is citing this all day.

99.99 percent of fully vaccinated people are protected from breakthrough infections serious enough for hospitalization and/or death.

Got it now?

And here's another source.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215689930

[LisaL]

161. CNN can repeat it every five minutes for all I care.

It's still nonsense. They got this number (the best I understand) out of incomplete stats for people already infected. Which many states don't even report.

[brush]

163. Tune in quick. Fauci was just on. I guess you know more than him.

[LisaL]

164. Oh for crying out loud.

NT

[brush]

166. Tune in right now. Dr. Vin Gupta is on right now saying the same thing.

[Treefrog]

178. No, he is not saying that.

[brush]

181. He did. Apparently you weren't watching because he said...

fully vaccinated people had a less than one percent chance of getting a breakthrough infection requiring hospitalization.

You kinda need to stop. You're wrong on this. I salute your persistence though.

[LisaL]

182. I think you are the one who needs to stop because you are wrong.

NT

[brush]

185. Did you actually tune in to CNN any time today? They've...

been citing the 99.99 percent protection for fully vaccinated people all day from getting a covid infection serious enough for hospitalization and/or death.

What's up? You don't believe the doctors?

But enough with this silliness. I'm done.

[LisaL]

188. I don't need to tune to CNN.

The number they keep talking about basically indicates that vast majority of vaccinated people have not died from covid at this point.
But vast majority of un-vaccinated people didn't die from covid either. 600,000 is still a small percentage of the population (and they have been un-vaccinated for a lot longer, since when covid started, everybody was un-vaccinated).
It doesn't mean what you think it means.

[brush]

190. God, you are so confused. Ya don't know what you're talking about.

I quoted what Dr. Vin Gupta and the hosts keep repeating and you're saying you know better, yet you admitted haven't even watched.

I think I'll go with the doctors. You're confused.

[Treefrog]

184. I know. It's awful when we women persist, isn't it?

[Ms. Toad]

198. Fauci said 96% effectiveness at keeping people out of the hospital.

That's dramatically different from .001% chance of being hospitalized.

[brush]

201. So we're quibbling over a difference of minuscule percentage points now?

Why that's HUGE.

And btw, Dr. Vin Gupta cited the .99.99 percent number and Don Lemon repeated it at the start of his show tonight.

[Ms. Toad]

204. First they represent two different different things.

Second the difference between .001% chance of being hospitalized with COVID (the CNN #) and a 4% chance of being hospitalized with COVID (Dr Fauci's #) is 4,000 times. i.e. if they both represented the same thing (which they don't), the number Dr. Fauci quoted indicates that you are 4,000 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID than the number you are touting.

You clearly don't understand what the number being bandied about means if you believe what Fauci was citing represents the same thing (and you have very little numerical intuition if you think the difference between 99.999% and 94% is "miniscule percentage points."

[brush]

206. Gupta says one thing, Fauci says another. Who are we to believe?

I get it that you have to be right, but the chances of fully vaccinated people getting covid serious enough to be hospitalized remains very small.

Agreed? Which has been the point all along.

[Ms. Toad]

207. You don't have to choose.

The numbers represent different (but related) facts.

The problem is that far too many people are using them interchangeably - which gives people a false sense of security about how good the vaccines are.

They are extremely effective. But they are not perfect. And the nature of vaccine effectiveness is that as cases in the unvaccinated grow, the casese in the vaccinated also grow because the ratio stays the same (roughly 94%) For every 100,000 people who aren't vaccinated who get a serious enough case of COVID to be hospitalized, in a similar sized population of vaccinated individuals with the same exposure there will be 4000 people who get breakthrough cases serious enough to be hospitalized (because that's what a 94% effectiveness means).

That is not the same as saying for every 100,000 people who are vaccinated only 1 will get a serious enough case of COVID to be hospitalized.

As the cases go up, Dr. Fauci's numbers will stay (roughly) the same - 96% effectiveness in keeping vaccinated individuals out of the hospital means that as there are more unvaccinated cases there will also be more vaccinated cases.

The same is not true of Dr. Gupta's numbers - as cases go up (see what Dr. Fauci's number means as cases go up), more vaccinated people will get breakthrough cases which will cause the number of breakthough cases relative to vaccinated individuals will grow because there will be more cases - AND - the denominator (# vaccinated) will remain relatively stable.

This has nothing to do with being right - it has to do with trying desperately to make sure that people understand the risks so they can take appropriate steps. A 4/100 chance of being hospitalized with COVID (relative to unvaccinated individuals) feels (and is) significanty different than when someone falsely asserts that your chances of getting COVID are .001% (or 1/100,000). The latter is a measure of how many people HAVE gotten COVID - not a prediction of how many will have breakthrough cases. Breakthrough cases are rare right now largely because until very recently the COVID caseload was low overall. To assume the breakthrough rate, relative to # vaccinated, will remain static is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the data means - leading to a false sense of security - further increasing the number of breakthrough cases.

[brush]

208. God, so much verbiage. The point again is the chance of...

fully vaccinated people getting covid serious enough to be hospitalized is very small. It doesn't take that many words to make that point.

[Ms. Toad]

209. But it isn't, and that's the point.

For every 100,000 unvaccinated individuals hospitalized, there will be about 4000 vaccinated ones hospitalized (assuming a population with 50% vaccination rate). Not 1, as those promoting the miniscule number being bandied about today are suggesting.

[brush]

211. That's what you're saying. The CDC otoh is saying that...

Last edited Tue Aug 3, 2021, 04:25 AM - Edit history (1)

99.999 (note they even added a third 9 from what I've been posting) percent of fully vaccinated people have not suffered an infection requiring hospitalization and/or resulting in death. Again, 99.999%

That was a chyron on the screen of Don Lemon's show on CNN tonight. So your figures differ from the CDC. I think I'll go with the CDC.

The show also pointed out that the delta variant is causing a pandemic among the nonvaccinated passing it on to other nonvaccinated people.

[Ms. Toad]

214. "Have not"

That is the key.

Think about last September, after the first two surges. At that time, the CDC would have said that 97.817% of people in the US have not contracted COVID. That was an accurate statement on September 18,2020. But it would not have meant that contracting COVID is rare, and that your chances of getting COVID are only 2.183%. It was simply a reflection of what had happened up to that point in time. But, As we all know, that number grew, partly because people looked at that number, thought it would continue remain low (so they didn't take steps to protect themselves and others.

This is a near exact parallel to the CDC % of people who "Have had" breakthrough cases as of today, heading into a surge like the one last October.

Just like the number of COVID cases could only grow in September 2020 (you can't unget COVID), the number of breakthrough cases can also only grow. When last year's October - January surge hit, the percentage of people who have not had COVID shrank to around 90%. In this surge, not only will the number of people who have had COVID will continue to grow, the number of vaccinated who have breakthrough cases will also grow, likely dramatically, (decreasing the number of vaccinated people who have not had a breakthrough case)

That is where the different number Dr. Fauci is using is critical to understanding the actual risk of a breakthrough case. The number of breakthrough cases rises in direct proportion to the number of cases in unvaccinated individuals. 4%, according to Dr. Fauci's 96% figure. So when there are are 100,000 new COVID cases (as there were Friday) it is likely that around 4000 of them are breakthrough cases. Notice that, although that is still very small, relative to overall cases, it is about 2/3 as many new breakthrough cases as the total ~ 6000 cases prior to that date.

So while the number Dr. Fauci is reciting is static (and is predictive), the number the CDC is reciting is a growing, cumulative number. It can, and will, get significantly larger over time, just like the % of people who "Have had" COVID over time can, and will grow. It is merely a reflection of what has happened in a period when vaccines were relatively fresh, mitigation was relatively high, and overall cases were low. It is not predictive of what will happen, now that none of the facts keeping that number low exist.

[brush]

215. We'll see if your projections come through. In the meantime, I'll stick with the CDC.

[Ms. Toad]

216. It isn't a projection.

It is literally reading the statistic from the CDC and explaining what it means, and whether it is mathematicallly valid to use it as a projection - it is not. It is purely a memory of what happened, not a projection about the future).

And - you don't trust Dr. Fauci? What you are calling a projecton is, again, literally reading his statistic on vaccine effectiveness and explaining what it means (and whether it is mathematically valid to use it as a projection - it is, absent new variants or better data about effectiveness).

The problem with waiting and seing what happens is that by the time it has happened, it is too lte to undo the damage you have done by not masking (infecting others, including children & contributing to the development of variants).

[brush]

217. I'm sticking with what is actually happening on the ground, thank you.

Please carry on with your numbers that haven't happened and get back to us later when they do.

[Ms. Toad]

218. Review my actual predictions from the last year.

They have been close to 100% accurate. The farthest off I've been was to express the hope that we would make it to fall before we experienced another surge like we are experiencing right now.

[mopinko]

60. please no.

this is a thing that is happening. i have friends who are drivers.
they're already tired of being exposed to this thing.

why do i have to say that exposing a driver just to not have to sanitize your own car just reeks?

[brush]

64. With both masked and the passenger in the back?

I used Uber several times in the past year. No problem. On my way to get vaccinated both time in fact.

I hope your friend isn't letting people into his car without masks. And if he's that worried, maybe he shouldn't drive, especially if he's not vaccinated. I sure hope he's smart enough to be fully vaccinated in such a job.

You do know the chances of fully vaccinated people getting sick enough to be hospitalized is minicule...many media outlets are exaggerating the chances of that. Doctors on CNN today just quoted that vaccinated people are 99.999 percent protected from getting hospitalized from covid.

Let's not repeat the over-hyped, right wing media panic that is going on.

[mopinko]

67. he is vaxxed, he doesnt let maskholes in.

but jeebus. acting like it's nothing to possibly infect someone making shit money w their personal car....

they arent emt's. they didnt sign up to be medical transport.
the thisweek up in v&m is all about emergency services, and talks about people taking ubers to the er.

this is madness.

[brush]

70. It's madness to listen to the right wing media hype that fully...

vaccinated people are in danger of getting sick enough to be hospitalized. CNN just now cited that fully vaccinated people are 99.999 percent protected from getting sick enough to be hospitalized.

Let's not spread those exaggerations.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215689930

[MrsCoffee]

72. Just stop with this right wing media shit.

No one is doing that here and you know it.

[brush]

74. Well, some people here are certainly exaggerating the chances...

of fully vaccinated and masked people getting breakthrough covid infections.

Right on this thread in fact.

Again, fully vaccinated people are 99.999 percent protected.

[Treefrog]

91. I don't think the protection is that high. Not anywhere near that.

Especially with the Delta variant.

Others who’ve been keeping up with the stats can provide them; multiple threads on it anyway.

[brush]

95. You know more than the doctors? It was just cited on CNN...

this morning. 99.999% protected from breakthrough infections serious enough to be hospitalized. Some media outlets, especially right wing ones, are hyping up and exaggerating the number of breakthrough infections to make Biden look like a failure in his vaccination push.

[Treefrog]

99. Reading comprehension is really becoming a lost skill.

Nowhere did I say I know more than doctors.

[brush]

155. Not in those exact words, but you did say: "I don't think the protection is that high...

Not anywhere near that" to my repeating what CNN and a doctor on CNN are saying all day that fully vaccinated people are 99.99 percent protected form breakthrough infections and needing hospitalization.

And here's another source.

So whose reading comprehension skills are questionable?

[Treefrog]

156. Ok, others have responded to you.

Good luck!

[LisaL]

110. That's a bullshit number.

I don't know where cnn got it. And even if it were true for alpha, it's clearly not true for delta.

[brush]

154. You don't have to take my word. Tune in to CNN. They've been citing it all day.

[LisaL]

162. I already told you-just because they repeat it all day doesn't mean it is accurate.

At the very least it's misleading. It doesn't mean that the exposed person (like OP) only has 0.01 % chance of catching covid.

[brush]

165. Is there a comprehension problem. The OP person is not...

fully vaccinated. As a matter of fact, a follow up post states that the person who wanted a ride to the hospital is not fully vaccinated.

[Ms. Toad]

124. You know that is nonsense.

Just because in a time of low infection rate, low transmission rate (non-Delta), higher effectiveness for the vaccine (non-Delta), when mitigation measures were in effect only .0001 individuals were breakthrough cases does not mean that vaccinated individuals have that kind of protection against COVID under the current circumstances (high transmssion, high infection rate, lower effectiveness).

If you want to use that number - please also provide how many non-vaccinated individuals were protected from getting sick enough to be hospitalized using the same calculations over the same time period. I.e. # non-vaccinated people hospitalized during that same period/total # of non-vaccinated individuals. Comparing the rate of infection against the rate of infection in the non-vaccinated population. Non-vaccination, measured by the same standards, would likely generate about 99.98% "protection against hospitalization."

The number you are citing is NOT protection against hospitalization. That number can only be obtained by comparing the vaccinated group against the unvaccinated group. Not by taking a snapshot in time of how many at that particular point in time, under those particular circumstances, have already (by the end of the measuring interval) come down with COVID.

[brush]

152. It's not about non-vaccinated people. The 99.99% is...

for fully vaccinated people as the doctor and CNN hosts are saying over and over today. Tune in if you don't believe me. Apparently they've finally got the message, probably from the administration, to stop exaggerating the chances of fully vaccinated people getting covid and having to be hospitalized. Again, 99.99%.

Got that?

[Ms. Toad]

159. I understand the figure is for vaccinated people

BUT - if at the same time 99.98% of the unvaccinated people stay out of the hospital, that makes the vaccine far less effective than if only 75% of the unvaccinated peopld stay out of the hospital.

Vaccine effectiveness is measured by comparing the experience of vaccinated people to the experience of unvaccinated people - not merely calculaing the percentage of vaccinated people who aren't hospitalized at some snapshot moment in time.

For example 96% of people who are vaccinated not getting disease XYZ sounds fantastic, until you compare it to the unvaccinated people and find out that 98% of the unvaccinated people don't get disease XYZ. Since that means that the vaccination actually makes you MORE suceptible to the disease.

It flies in the face of science to suggest you can evaluate the effectiveness of a vaccine, or the likelihood of it keeping you out of the hospital without comparing it to what happens if you are NOT vaccinated. A % of people who are vaccinated who do not end up in the hospital is absolutely meaningless without that comparison.

Since Dr. Fauci just said that the vaccine is 96% effective at preventing hospitalizations, that means the 99.975% of unvaccinated individuals who ALSO avoided going to the hospital with COVID. In other words, calculated the same way as the CNN% NOT being vaccinated is 99.975% effective in preventing hosptalization for COVID. (Notice Dr. Fauci did not say the vaccine was 99.999% effective at preventing hospitalization, since he understands the difference between a meaningless snaphot and the actual effectiveness of a vaccine.)

I certainly hope CNN did not get that message from the Biden administration, snice it would mean that the Biden administration is more focused on (misleading) messaging than it is in applying scientific principles.

[brush]

192. Take it up with the doctors and hosts on CNN citing that figure.

[Ms. Toad]

197. Before you spread information, you have an obligation to understand it,

so that you don't contribute to the spread of misinformation. (In addition to understanding it so you can make wise decisions for your own behavior - which is impossible if you really believe your chance of being hospitalized with COVID is .001%)

[brush]

199. Don Lemon on CNN at the start of his show cited the same figure.

I didn't pull that figure out of thin air. CNN hosts and Dr. Vin Gupta all day have been citing that figure, probably to dispel erroneous disinformation that tons of fully vaccinated people are getting breakthrough covid cases and have to be hospitalized.

[Ms. Toad]

200. I have.

I check my sources, and review the data to make sure I understand what it means before I spread it.

It doesn't matter how many people are citing information in a misleading way - it is still misleading.

Do you even understand how effectiveness of a vaccine is calculated? It CANNOT be calculated without comparing the data to what happens in a similarly situated unvaccinated group. So the number being bandied about is only half of the information needed to discss the effectiveness of a vaccine.

Primary efficacy analysis demonstrates BNT162b2 to be 95% effective against COVID-19 beginning 28 days after the first dose;170 confirmed cases of COVID-19 were evaluated, with 162 observed in the placebo group versus 8 in the vaccine group

https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-conclude-phase-3-study-covid-19-vaccine

Placebo group = unvaccinated
8/162 = .04938 => the vaccinated group had 5% as many infections as the unvaccinated group = 95% effective at suppressing COVID.

The number being bandied about today does not contain (and was not calculated using) the critical infection rate for the unvaccinated population.

[brush]

202. So we can't take Dr. Vin Gupta's word now?

[LisaL]

213. The figure doesn't mean what you think it means.

A small proportion of people who are vaccinated died so far.
But covid is not a highly lethal disease, so relatively small proportion of totally un-vaccinated people died as well.
It doesn't mean that vaccines are 99.99 % effective.
It also doesn't tell you what your chance of catching covid is if you are exposed.

[greenjar_01]

66. Thank you!

I thought I was losing my mind looking at that response. Fuck's sake.

[greenjar_01]

65. You know somebody actually drives those, right?

WTF?

[pinkstarburst]

86. If you've been exposed

you should NOT be taking Uber or Lyft and exposing the low-wage rideshare driver. Sorry, but that is a jerk move.

There are plenty of options here that do not involve exposing anyone.

1) The OP can order an online test and leave it on neighbor's porch (no contact with anyone.)

2) IF neighbor begins showing symptoms and needs urgent medical attention, he can call EMS. They are in protective gear and this is expected in their line of work, just like doctors and nurses at the ER. Knowingly exposing people unnecessarily like uber/lyft drivers, or grocery store workers, who are low wage workers, especially when it's so YOU won't personally be exposed or get your own car dirty, is a jerk move.

[brush]

97. Anybody driving Uber or Lyft and hasn't taken the time to get...

vaccinated, masked and requiring passengers be masked is a fool. A doctor on CNN today just cited that fully vaccinated people are 99.999 percent protected from breakthrough infections. And if, by the minuscule chance they do get infected, it won't required hospitalization.

I think I'll go with the doctors and science.

[LisaL]

10. Yikes. You are high risk.

Even vaxxed, if he is infected, he is carrying a high viral load.

[brush]

58. Where in the post does it say he's infected?

[FBaggins]

80. And where does it say that everyone infected carries a high viral load?

At best, that's an awful reading of recent news.

[brush]

83. What does your post mean. All I asked is where does it say he's infected?

[FBaggins]

84. I was agreeing with you

In addition to not indicating that the person had been infected… it’s ridiculous to say that he’s extra-infectious if he is infected.

[LisaL]

116. Right in the OP.

Neighbor turned out to be positive. I bet he is symptomatic too. And he actually wasn't vaxxed.

[brush]

153. He wasn't vaccinated. Well those not vaccinated are driving the spread.

The original OP said he thought he was exposed.

[North Shore Chicago]

12. You are a good neighbor.

You can be both a good neighbor and take care of your family by NOT taking your own vehicle. As others have spoken, a Lyft or Uber, taxi.

Take care.

[LisaL]

13. Then he will expose uber or lyft driver.

If he has symptoms, he should call the paramedics.

[North Shore Chicago]

19. Valid point Lisa

The drivers I see around here have plexi shields separating the driver from passengers.

But, your idea is sounds good as well, the only thing is using an ambulance to get a test seems extreme and there will be one less emergency vehicle out there in service.

[LisaL]

24. Well, if he is symptomatic and old, they could take him to a hospital for treatment.

If he is not symptomatic, get him a take at home test, like others suggested.

[North Shore Chicago]

27. Good thought process.

[dsc]

46. He should be upfront with said drive

and take the precautions outlined above. I am assuming a uber or lyft driver would be considerably younger than the OP

[LeftInTX]

15. Buy neighbor at-home kit

Leave it on their porch.

If negative, keep in touch with your neighbor via phone or text.

Test again etc

If neighbor doesn't develop symptoms within a week, should be OK..

Have neighbor call his/her doctor...

I did a teledoc thing last week....

[FBaggins]

22. Sure. The risk is miniscule

Pre-vaccine, there might be some risk, but a vaccinated person exposed to covid is still unlikely to catch it... let alone catch it and already be shedding enough virus to expose you...

... and then I assume that you've been vaccinated too.

Almost no risk at all. Particularly if you both mask up.


Keep in mind that even if infected, it can take a couple of days before a test will catch it. If the neighbor was just exposed, it may be too early to test.

[LisaL]

25. Yea, sure.

If you believe that I have a bridge for sale. And if there is so little risk, why does the neighbor have to go to a hospital for a test to begin with?

[FBaggins]

32. The OP said that the neighbor was exposed

You can't read anything into asking for a hospital. Obviously, if they were sick enough to ask for a ride to the hospital it would be an entirely different conversation - because they would have already passed the "did the vaccine protect me from getting infected?" and "did the vaccine keep it mild enough that I don't need a hospital?" phase.

[LisaL]

33. So there is no point of OP getting exposed himself.

If the neighbor has no symptoms, the situation is not urgent and neighbor can use a take at home test.
If neighbor is symptomatic he should call the paramedics. Neighbor can also call his doctor for instructions on what to do next.

[FBaggins]

76. So which is it?

The risk is so great that she should not assist her neighbor or the risk is so small that there's no need to give the neighbor a ride in the first place?

I'll go back to the original answer. Knowing only that a vaccinated person thinks that they have been exposed, with no indication that they've been infected and also knowing that the OP is also vaccinated... the risk of a breakthrough infection that has already infected the exposed enough to be shedding virus and then a second breakthrough? That's miniscule by every report we've seen. Add masks and the risk isn't worth worrying about.

[LisaL]

101. Well, as it turns out, the neighbor is positive.

And OP did drive him to the hospital.

[madville]

92. I think Delta has changed all of this, it was once the case but

Last edited Mon Aug 2, 2021, 01:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Dr. Fauci was just saying on NPR that with Delta the vaccinated can catch and spread Delta just as easily as the unvaccinated and have the same amount of virus load, that's why Delta is so contagious. This wasn't the case with previous variants but Delta is acting completely different.

Also, the amount of virus shed into the air with Delta is so much more than with previous variants nothing less than a N95/KN95 rated tight fitting mask should be considered effective with Delta. Simple cloth and loose fitting or vented masks should not be depended on for protection now.

We have had a wave of COVID spread through some shifts at work. 50% of those getting symptomatic infections are vaccinated, most with Pfizer and a couple had J&J, mask wearing has been mandatory but no one is wearing N95 masks, its really whatever people bring in or the cheap disposable surgical masks.

[FBaggins]

96. Fauci never said that the vaccinated were as likely to catch and/or spread Delta

He said that those few who do catch it are likely to be as infectious because the viral load is similar... but they are far less likely to catch it.

And in this case, we're talking about two degrees of separation/vaccination.

[LisaL]

106. There are hundreds of them who caught it in small MA town alone.

NT

[FBaggins]

111. So? Why are we ignoring thousands of other datapoints?

Feel free to cherry-pick. The overwhelming majority of the evidence says that the vaccinated are far less likely to catch the virus and, if they catch it, are far less likely to have significant illness or death.

[LisaL]

113. WTF are you talking about?

What thousands of other data points?
Delta is producing a lot more breakthrough cases. Whatever numbers they are talking about on cnn, it's not new data pertaining to delta.

[FBaggins]

114. Delta has been the primary variant in many countries for months now.

It represents almost all of the infections in the UK and Israel for instance... and the Massachuset data does not align with breakthrough rates in other states.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/fully-vaccinated-people.html

[LisaL]

115. Israel has reported much lower Pfizer efficacy with delta.

But that doesn't align with anything either?
They are plenty of vaxxed people in the UK who are getting delta too.

[FBaggins]

120. And yet they're averaging just 1-2 deaths per day.

But that doesn't align with anything either?

It certainly doesn't align with claims that the vaccinated are as likely to catch/spread delta as the unvaccinated... or that 75% of infections are among the vaccinated.

[LisaL]

136. OP is seventy year old fighting cancer.

The people who die are usually elderly with conditions, and OP fits that bill, doesn't he?

[FBaggins]

137. Sigh

The people who die are usually elderly with conditions and unvaccinated.

The original story was that both the neighbor and the poster were vaccinated and that the neighbor had merely been exposed.

The story now appears to be that the neighbor was positive and symptomatic. MF's risk is still fairly low, but that does change the calculation.

[LisaL]

139. Vaccinated people who die are usually elderly with conditions.

And as it turns out neighbor wasn't even vaccinated.

[FBaggins]

142. That's true for people falling down the stairs too

The claim was that vaccinated people are just as likely to catch/transmit the Delta variant as those who have not been vaccinated. You can dodge and weave all you like, but none of the data backs that up.

The fact you keep conveniently ignoring is that vaccinated people are at much lower risk of catching the virus and much lower risk of significant illness if they do catch it.

The combination of those two facts cannot be missed in the data. Huge explosions of infection numbers, but comparatively small increases in mortality statistics. The UK numbers are very illuminating. Their Delta-peak was almost as high (in infections) as their pre-vaccine peak in January, yet their death figures barely budged... and now infection rates are tumbling rapidly.

[Renew Deal]

28. First thing for them is to not panic.

You don’t need to go to the hospital for a test. Open clinics and many doctors offices should be able to do it. There are corporate style clinics that do it quickly.

If you’re not comfortable driving, maybe let them take your car. Or order them a taxi/Lyft, etc.

But if they were just exposed, it might takes a few days to turn up positive if they do at all.

I wonder how they were exposed. Proximity, casual hug, work, intimacy.

[LisaL]

29. I am assuming the neighbor is elderly, since he needs to be taken care of.

Probably no longer drives.

[pinkstarburst]

34. You can order an at-home test ONLINE

and have it sent to your house, and leave it on his porch. You don't need to come into contact with him at all.

https://www.cvs.com/shop/home-health-care/home-tests/home-covid-test

You are high risk, your wife is high risk, and your mother is high risk. You should not expose yourselves by driving him to the hospital. If he is having acute symptoms (difficulty breathing, fever), he should call the paramedics. If he is not having symptoms, and merely wants to find out his covid status, then an at-home test will be fine.

Some people have advised him taking an Uber or Lyft. I disagree with this. It's incredibly inconsiderate to the Uber or Lyft driver (a low wage worker) to expose them to someone who you know has been exposed to covid.

[LisaL]

35. ITA.

There are tests the neighbor can take at home if he is not symptomatic.

[SheltieLover]

42. +1,000!

[brewens]

36. He should call his doc or the hospital and ask what they want him to do. Since it sounds like he's

asymptomatic, I can't see risking it.

[Ninga]

39. Your neighbor asked the wrong person.You. Your neighbor needs to call his doc post haste and ask

about next steps. Your neighbor needs to explain that he needs transportation.

[WhiteTara]

41. Double mask and leave all the windows open

don't turn on the ac so that the virus won't recirculate.

[SheltieLover]

43. No way, MF!

Call him an Uber. Even fully vaxed carry 1,000 times the viral load & shed it at the same rate!

More contagious than smallpox (Dr. Ding), chickenpox (CDC) & common cold (CBS)!

Please stay safe!

[MrsCoffee]

48. Why does everyone want to expose the Uber and Lyft drivers who then risk exposing

their other passengers.

Am I missing something here?

[Wingus Dingus]

75. Being exposed doesn't mean you have Covid.

If you go out in public, at this point, and spend more than 15 minutes in one spot near anyone, you might be exposed. Now if this person had symptoms, they should get a healthier vaccinated person to drive them to test and then back home to isolate, or call a doctor and ask what to do. But Uber and Lyft drivers must know that anyone in their cars could potentially be carrying the virus and protect themselves accordingly. Same as bus drivers and cab drivers. Obviously the person should mask up, probably double mask.

[LisaL]

109. 15 minutes is old news.

Delta takes seconds to infect someone.

[Wingus Dingus]

44. Have to consider WHEN this person was exposed, how they know they were exposed,

what the incubation period is for Delta variant, whether the neighbor has any symptoms...I would think you could get a Lyft or Uber or cab to take them, as long as this person is masked up. Some cities I think have elderly transportation services too.

[helpisontheway]

51. He should purchase one of the rapid tests that you do at home

I have a couple at home. I think I paid $18 for two tests. Oh and you do not have to stick the swab far up.

[Ms. Toad]

54. Why buy what is available for free?

Tests are essentially walk in, at the moment. (My spouse, and our daughters boyfriend got same-day appointments)

[helpisontheway]

121. Because he did not have a ride. Nt

[Ms. Toad]

126. Since he later took his confirmed positive neighbor to the hospital

that seems kind of silly.

Avoid exposure to someone potentially positive by buying a test kit and swabbing the neighbor's nose (which he did) - bu then hop in a car and drive him to the hospital AFTER it is confirmed that he actually is positive.

[Ms. Toad]

52. I would double mask,

Require then to do the same, and take them.

[jmbar2]

53. Call an ambulance or medical transport STAT

You are not trained to handle this.

[FBaggins]

78. Seriously??

If you call 911 because you were in the presence of someone with COVID... you deserve whatever "wasting their time" penalty the emergency services people want to assign.

[jmbar2]

79. OK, my bad

I thought the neighbor was in distress. If it's just for a test, mask up and take him.

[sarisataka]

56. I would do it /nt

[clutterbox1830]

62. Yes, if it is a good neighbor or friend.

You are both vaccinated and requested a drive to a test center not hospital.
I would have no problem if my neighbor also requested me to do the same.

[babylonsister]

68. If you look after neighbor, you need to get a test, too.

Hopefully you're both fine.

[Maru Kitteh]

77. Both of you masked (with an N95 if possible) windows down, back seat

passenger side for him. I think that would be a reasonable accommodation and the safest possible configuration I can think of, posing roughly the same risk as a trip to the grocery store in my estimation.

[GoodRaisin]

81. And if your neighbor tests positive, what then?

Then he would be told to go home and quarantine, which he can do anyway. Your neighbor actually has a lot of options that don't involve exposing you.

I would not.

[marble falls]

87. This neighbor has a lots of "condition issues". He has Huntington's, he's been majorly ...

... reassembled after a horrific auto accident - running from the police. Between the Huntinton's and the accident, he was given parole as a three time felon because the Fed system did not have a clue how to care for him.

He's dying cell by cell physically and neurologically. And aware of his decline. He's on so many drugs, I have no clue how he manages. He has a housekeeper in a couple of days a week, and she prepares some meals for him.

He scares me and while I can out run him easy, he presses 300# and I know he could literally crush the breath out of me.

He needs care, and he needs to know he's not alone. I can't abandon him. It would be an "infamia".

[GoodRaisin]

98. I understand,

all too well really. I’m battling neurological issues too.

Perhaps you could go and buy him a home test and start there. Try a method that doesn’t expose you

[LisaL]

103. But you got yourself exposed in the process.

NT

[Skittles]

183. may I ask, did you ever ask him before this if he had received the shots?

I checked all my neighbors, especially a "shut in" in case they needed help or persuasion.

[greenjar_01]

203. What in the world?

[Renew Deal]

90. And if he tests negative today because it's too soon...

Same problem. I generally agree with you. I would find alternative solutions. Home tests being a good first step...

[marble falls]

94. The home test gave him a hot positive. He's at the hospital, right now.

[FakeNoose]

119. Uh-oh! You were being careful and wearing your mask, right?

Now that you know he's got the virus, you need to look out for YOU and your loved ones.

[LisaL]

135. Mask won't work well against delta unless its N95.

NT

[Renew Deal]

144. You deserve credit for being a good person and putting yourself in danger to help your neighbor.

[Jim G.]

88. Oh, Man...

Sending positive thoughts. I sure hope you dodge it.


But it feels to me like you did the right thing anyway. I'd like to think I would do the same thing for a neighbor, but until you come face to face with something like that you can't be certain.

[blogslug]

89. Oh, man, wow

That just sucks all around.

Good wishes for you and for everybody.

[JCMach1]

93. As other people pointed out, you are likely infected unless you are

Just randomly super lucky.

I drove people to testing too... Just made me the last one to get sick.

And yes, we were all masked, windows open, all precautions.

It's the proximity in the car that's the problem.

[LisaL]

140. Also, the time spend in a small enclosed area.

With no ventilation.
And delta is much more infectious than regular covid.

[Treefrog]

100. Well someone on this forum just told me that if you're vaxxed then you're 99.99% safe.

[LisaL]

102. That's a complete and utter nonsense.

Even clinical trials didn't achieve those kind of spectacular results, and that was before delta.

[Treefrog]

117. I know. I'll see if I can find the thread.

People actually believe this.

[MissB]

127. Probably based on the current CNN headine

Which implies essentially that

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/31/health/fully-vaccinated-people-breakthrough-hospitalization-death/index.html

I’m not commenting on whether I believe that, just pointing out that it’s out there.

[Treefrog]

129. Yeah, I believe that's regarding hospitalization, not infection.

The poster was referring to infection.

But Pfizer and Moderna were never credited with more than 95%, so if CNN is saying that, that’s alarming.

[MissB]

130. Right

I think that’s likely where they got the figure. It’s what people do- they read an article and don’t always interpret it the way that it should be interpreted.

For example, the headline says breakthrough infections are rare and then the article talks about hospitalizations and uses the 99.9% figure. It’s easy to see where someone doesn’t quite associate the right figure with the corresponding concept.

[Treefrog]

131. The whole thing is so frightening that it's easy to miss the details.

[LisaL]

133. 99.99% number doesn't sound correct for hospitalizations either.

I have clue what this number refers to or how it was calculated.

[Ms. Toad]

150. Have not had is not the same as will not have under the current circumstances. n/t

[634-5789]

105. You did good.

Hoping all's well with your test.

[LisaL]

108. So he lied to you about getting vaxxed?

And then exposed you to covid?
I am guessing he is symptomatic as well, isn't he?

[Treefrog]

132. I know, that jumped out to me as well.

Why would he lie about that? Holy cow.

[LisaL]

134. Probably so OP felt safe helping him.

That would be my guess.

[Treefrog]

141. Yes, but how wrong.

Sheesh. And then tell him in the car?

[LisaL]

173. And like was suggested to OP numerous times, call an ambulance.

Let paramedics deal with covid patient. Now OP has been exposed. He in turn can expose his wife and mother in law.

[LisaL]

112. Your wife is not pleased because now you have been exposed.

Delta is extremely infectious. It takes mere seconds to infect someone.
Which is why it rapidly spreads. Since it's airborne, all the clothes washing is not going to do any good.
The cloth masks (if that's what you were wearing) are not good enough to protect from delta.

[Ms. Toad]

118. I hoped you were double masked

with the windows open, both for the testing and the ride to the hospital.

Once confrmed, though, you should have called an ambulance. The point of buying a test kit, rather than taking him to a free testing site, was to avoid a ride in a small enclosed space with someone potentially exposed. You went from avoiding a potential exposure to exposing yourself to a known positive case. Being a Christian is one thing - but you need to do it safely when there are safe alternatves (like an ambulance)

Your clothes are NOT the issue - it ws riding in a confined space, breathing the air exhaled by someone who is positive.

You now need to protect your wife. If you can, for the next 2 weeks move into a separate room - preferably with an air purifier that captures particles down to .3 microns and filters the size room you're in several times an hour. Get yourself tested at least twice - one perhaps 3-4 days out, one about a week out. Have her leave food at your door. Double-mask when you leave your rooom. Run the ventilation fan in the bathroom for an hour or so after you use it - if you've showered (i.e. taken off your mask) run the air purifier in the bathroom for at least an hour.

[LisaL]

138. Exactly.

Neighbor showed no consideration for OP (why did OP think neighbor was vaxxed?), yet OP here risked his life for no apparent reason, and now that of his wife and his mother in law.
Reading between the lines, neighbor is likely symptomatic, otherwise why is he in the hospital?
Call the paramedics, they at least have proper PPE.

[ZonkerHarris]

122. On the ride I hope you berated them for not getting vaxxed, repeatedly.

[MissB]

123. I'll be crossing my fingers that you remain unaffected by covid

[totodeinhere]

125. I would not have driven him to the hospital. Too dangerous.

I feel bad for the guy but I would not put my life at risk. You could suggest to him that he call his doctor's office for advice.

[Treefrog]

145. Depending on the neighbor, I probably would. Almost certainly.

But finding out mid ride that he lied about his vax status would have surely changed my future relationship with these neighbors.

[LisaL]

147. You would have to live long enough to have future relationship. Same goes for the neighbor.

NT

[Treefrog]

149. VERY good point!

[Treefrog]

167. True, but the fact is I had the virus. I didn't die, nor was I hospitalized.

I’m not in a high risk category and am vaxxed.

I’d probably take the neighbor, but masked and in the back seat. Windows open.

I just would. Again, the revelation that he lied would probably presage a bad end to any future friendship.

[LisaL]

171. I am in a high risk category.

So I will not be driving any covid positive neighbors anywhere any time soon. Get a freaking ambulance, neighbors.

[Treefrog]

174. I understand your feelings.

But ambulances are ungodly expensive.

Anyhow, this neighbor who lied would be marked NO in my mind from ever on. I hear ya. I think we’re on the same page here.

[Renew Deal]

170. A darker view of this situation is...

The neighbor is willing to kill you to save themselves.

[greatauntoftriplets]

157. Get yourself tested, please.

ASAP. I hope that you're OK, but this is scary. Your wife also should get tested now.

[LisaL]

160. Testing won't work right away.

It takes 4-5 days for a test to turn positive (maybe a little less with delta).

[Maru Kitteh]

195. Current CDC recommendation for the vaccinated with close contact

is to test 3-5 days following exposure.

[marble falls]

176. We'll be tested next Monday. These are new and "exciting" times and what to do is not clear ...

... up front a lot of times.

[LisaL]

180. Test should turn positive in 4-5 days after exposure.

What's the point of waiting a whole week? So now you can buy some tests and administer them at home. Were you exposed to the neighbor before today?

[LeftInTX]

187. I would test on Thursday

[herding cats]

193. That should be fine so long as you distance and don't manifest symptoms.

My heart ❤️ to you and the wife. I know this stress, hubby was recently exposed (a week ago last Tuesday. He's fully vaxxed, lied to by someone and tested negative 5 days later) and had to live in our RV until we were really, really sure. We were so worried.

[Maru Kitteh]

196. Marble Falls, the current CDC guidelines for vaccinated people who have

close contact with a COVID positive person is to test 3-5 days after exposure. 5 days would put you at Saturday. You could purchase a home test and do that for peace of mind. Monday should be fine. We had a breakthrough infection today who tested positive. Her initial exposure was on June 26. She had tested negative as late as Friday the 30th.

For what it's worth, this person was a caregiver for 3 people with COVID in her family so she had EXTENSIVE ongoing exposure to the virus. That's a LOT of exposure. A LOT.

[GoodRaisin]

205. Good luck

and try not to worry. Your own vaccines should protect you.

[ecstatic]

168. Statistically speaking, you should be fine but here's my kitchen sink routine

when I think I've been exposed: Caffeine, multivitamin with vitamin D, 100% juice with Vitamin C (separate from multivitamin), and now quercetin with zinc. I also read that a natural protease inhibitor is helpful to stop any replication. Legume seeds.

Good luck. You did the right thing.

[cally]

212. What are legume seeds?

Just any type of legume or something different?

[LeftInTX]

169. Man. I'm sorry Marble Falls...

He couldn't test himself?
That sucks......

All you can do is isolate and test...

I guess order some tests online and have them delivered...

[sakabatou]

172. He lied to you about being vaxxed?!

WTF?!

[ornotna]

175. Probably the last good deed you'll be doing for this guy

Sad to say but if he hasn't been vaccinated he may not be coming home. Shame he misled you like that.

[LisaL]

177. Most people don't die, even un-vaxxed.

And the guy still could walk, so doesn't sound like he was near death.
People who die (vaxxed or un-vaxxed) tend to be elderly or with risk factors. Huntington (the disease neighbor has) does make it risker once positive.

"Huntington’s disease does not necessarily put patients at a higher risk of contracting COVID-19. However, individuals with Huntington’s may be at a higher risk of complications from the virus due to issues with swallowing and clearing secretions from the lungs. They also may be more likely to develop pneumonia as a result of being bedridden and undernourished."

https://huntingtonsdiseasenews.com/information-about-covid-19-for-huntingtons-disease-patients/

[totodeinhere]

194. I'm 75, have several serious underlying conditions, yet when I caught Covid last December I had a

very mild case. I would not have known I had it except for the fact that I got tested because I was in contact with someone else who had it. But even so I do not want to get a breakthrough infection even though odds are it would also be very mild.

[appalachiablue]

219. Vy glad, you must be in great health w good genes.

[Meowmee]

179. Not a good idea

For elderly with symptoms call an ambulance. Couldn't he do a home test himself? Please quarantine to protect your wife etc.

He lied about vaccination. You help him, were you around him before him getting tested and after his exposure prior to helping him test etc?

[XanaDUer2]

186. You've been a good neighbor

and he's been a real shit.

Sending positive thoughts to you and your family that you're okay and not infected.

I would not help this person again. Too loose with the truth.

Best wishes, XaD

PS hope his maid is okay!

[Solly Mack]

189. You're a decent person. Compassionate.

I hope for the best

I also thank you for showing that kindness.

[orleans]

210. you'll probably never see this post (the thread is so long)

but i'm wondering if you assumed your neighbor had gotten the vaccine or did he tell you he was vaxxed?

if he said he was vaxxed and then you not only bought the test but you swabbed him, and then his car confession with you, admitting he really hadn't gotten the vaccine i think your neighbor is a big fucking asshole.

i certainly understand why your wife is "none too pleased."

with all that said, you were extremely kind and thoughtful/selfless to help him to the extent you did.

i hope you quarantine until you know you don't have it (so your wife doesn't get it).

and if you caught it, i hope to god you're okay and remain asymptomatic.