My brother has COVID

[nfceagles]

I wouldn’t let your DB’s kids in your house or around your family this week. I don’t know how but I would find a way to avoid them all together. I may be being paranoid, but I feel like they aren’t out of the woods yet. If they caught it from him on one of his last contagious days, they may not be testing positive yet. Or have a mild case that isn’t triggering a positive result.

Can your nanny go to his house, get them to camp, and then come over to your house?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PZMommy]

With your trip a week away, I’d avoid your brother’s family this week. It’s just not worth the risk.

[basil]

I wish I had a teen to hire!

I think we will cobble some hours together between me, DH, and my mother to watch our kids sometimes, so that nanny can split time in between my house and DB's house. It's a major pain for all of us though. The hardest days are thankfully later in the week. I think every day that goes by gets a little safer.

[SnuggleBuggles]

I wish I had a teen to hire!

I think we will cobble some hours together between me, DH, and my mother to watch our kids sometimes, so that nanny can split time in between my house and DB's house. It's a major pain for all of us though. The hardest days are thankfully later in the week. I think every day that goes by gets a little safer.

Put a call out on social media. My 1 teen is between summer activities and my other teen isn't getting the hours he hoped for at his job...there could be other teens twidling their thumbs in your social sphere!

[essnce629]

How did they get it if they were low risk? Based on DB's experience, I probably would want to take it if I got COVID, but don't qualify under any of the high risk conditions.

Just FYI but Pfizer released their results a few weeks ago on the use of Paxlovid in low risk vaccinated individuals and there was no benefit. The previous studies that showed a 89% decrease in hospitalizations and death were in unvaccinated and high risk populations. So I wouldn't necessarily be running out to get Paxlovid if you don't actually qualify. I do wish the studies showed otherwise, but unfortunately they did not. I do have many friends who have taken Paxlovid who are under 50, but they all had at least 1 risk factor, even if it was just a BMI of 26. DH and I don't qualify either. TWIV covered the study a few weeks ago. The good thing is that fully vaccinated low risk people are not getting severe covid or ending up in the hospital or dying with or without Paxlovid. I am curious if it will prevent long covid though and those studies should be happening. I was hoping that Paxlovid would be approved for low risk individuals but looks like all future studies on that population have been scrapped.

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/vaccin...ry?id=85418012

Sent from my SM-A526U1 using Tapatalk

[basil]

Just FYI but Pfizer released their results a few weeks ago on the use of Paxlovid in low risk vaccinated individuals and there was no benefit. The previous studies that showed a 89% decrease in hospitalizations and death were in unvaccinated and high risk populations. So I wouldn't necessarily be running out to get Paxlovid if you don't actually qualify. I do wish the studies showed otherwise, but unfortunately they did not. I do have many friends who have taken Paxlovid who are under 50, but they all had at least 1 risk factor, even if it was just a BMI of 26. DH and I don't qualify either. TWIV covered the study a few weeks ago. The good thing is that fully vaccinated low risk people are not getting severe covid or ending up in the hospital or dying with or without Paxlovid. I am curious if it will prevent long covid though and those studies should be happening. I was hoping that Paxlovid would be approved for low risk individuals but looks like all future studies on that population have been scrapped.

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/vaccin...ry?id=85418012

Sent from my SM-A526U1 using Tapatalk

I'm sure the studies on low risk people didn't show a benefit of Paxlovid on hospitalizations/deaths...because low risk people were at such a low risk to start with.

The problem is that we are still treating it like a life threatening disease, even if it's not. So isolate in your household, stay home from work for X days, scrap your vacation, get stuck in a foreign country for 10 days, etc. I guess there are people out there who could weather these life disruptions easily...but not me! So if there is a drug that can get me to "negative test and not infectious" sooner, then I'm all for it, even if I don't believe I'm at any significant risk of hospitalization from COVID. Same with the booster. If it decreases my risk by 10%, well then I'll go for it. Better than nothing. And I bet this is what georgiegirl's friends were thinking too. We (as a society) take all sorts of meds to affect outcomes other than hospitalizations. Tylenol, Ibuprofen, Claritin, Robitussin, Sudafed, etc, don't prevent hospitalization. They just make us able to function better when something else betrays us.

My DB spent 5 days in his guest room, only emerging to use the restroom when no one else was there. They even decided he couldn't walk the dog in the yard when everyone else had left the house, for fear he could leave COVID on her fur! This is a significant cost! Even though his wife remained negative, she couldn't work. If without Paxlovid that would be 10 days instead of 5...that's not insignificant.

I think I generally have about the same risk of getting a URI on a cruise as I always have. Never has been zero. In fact, my whole family (including grandparents and DB's family) got super sick in February 2020 after DD picked up some nasty virus on a plane. So for the foreseeable future, I'll wear masks on a plane to prevent this outcome. But when people decide that if I get a certain URI on a plane, I have to stay in an inside room with no window for x number of days, screw up my return plans, cost me thousands of dollars, etc., then I want the tools to make this outcome less likely for myself (i.e. vaccines and treatments). There is a disconnect between severity of outcome and recommended reaction that is really hard to swallow. This is what I think we are getting wrong with the pandemic response at this point.

[essnce629]

My DB spent 5 days in his guest room, only emerging to use the restroom when no one else was there. They even decided he couldn't walk the dog in the yard when everyone else had left the house, for fear he could leave COVID on her fur! This is a significant cost! Even though his wife remained negative, she couldn't work. If without Paxlovid that would be 10 days instead of 5...that's not insignificant.

Why couldn't his wife work? CDC guidelines for those exposed are no need to stay home or quarantine unless you're not up to date on vaccines or development symptoms. If no symptoms develop, take a test on day 5 and wear a mask in public till day 10. Seems like they were being a little more extreme than necessary?

Sent from my SM-A526U1 using Tapatalk

[georgiegirl]

Why couldn't his wife work? CDC guidelines for those exposed are no need to stay home or quarantine unless you're not up to date on vaccines or development symptoms. If no symptoms develop, take a test on day 5 and wear a mask in public till day 10. Seems like they were being a little more extreme than necessary?

Sent from my SM-A526U1 using Tapatalk

I’m guessing she couldn’t work because she didn’t have childcare.

The whole dog fur thing is ridiculous.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[basil]

I’m guessing she couldn’t work because she didn’t have childcare.

The whole dog fur thing is ridiculous.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes, the dog fur thing was over the top

But yeah, they have a 5 yo and a 2 yo, and their childcare consists of my nanny and the 5 yo going to preschool part time, with my mom as backup when those fall through. Preschool makes them attest every day that the kid doesn't have symptoms and wasn't exposed, so that was out. And then I didn't want my nanny watching them cause of my vacation and need to test negative. No one wanted Mom potentially exposing herself. And the 2 yo is not fully vaccinated (just started with her first dose), making it that she's technically supposed to quarantine, I think.

We'd have NEVER taken any of those precautions and it wouldn't have caused a fraction of the disruption in their lives if he had a different URI that wasn't COVID. So if COVID is behaving like a regular cold in most vaccinated/healthy people, why can't we treat it that way at this point?

And if we aren't, then I'm going to want to use each tool that I can to prevent the psychosocial bad outcomes.

[wendibird22]

We'd have NEVER taken any of those precautions and it wouldn't have caused a fraction of the disruption in their lives if he had a different URI that wasn't COVID. So if COVID is behaving like a regular cold in most vaccinated/healthy people, why can't we treat it that way at this point?

At this point in the arc of the pandemic, I agree with you. And this was basically what our local health department director was saying. By and large this is nothing more than a cold for most people and we have mitigation strategies, vaccines, and anti-virals for those who aren't "most people." He is a proponent of moving to "living with COVID."