Title

  • CantaloupeAss [comrade/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Longer quarantine and longer dangerous infectious period - the benefit is that paxlovid reduces the likelihood of a serious case?

    I'm curious because I got COVID a few months ago and was prescribed paxlovid, but I never took it because I was afraid of exactly what you described (along with the other side effects)

    • sovietknuckles [they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      longer dangerous infectious period

      For the 5 days you're taking Paxlovid, give or take, you're not contagious (you'll test negative on a rapid test). So it's the same total number of days you're contagious, just with a small break in the middle.

      along with the other side effects

      The side effects of COVID are far worse, I don't know why anyone would ever pick COVID over Paxlovid. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, anti-vaxxers also make argument you're making, but instead about why everyone should skip the vaccine.

      • ElmLion [any]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Paxlovid is not on the same level as vaccines; its benefit-cost ratio is not worth it 100% of the cases. It is an effective medicine that can significantly reduce risk of hospitalization, but a blanket recommendation is not good advice.

      • CantaloupeAss [comrade/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Don't get me wrong, I have gotten 4 shots, mask up and everything. By the time I got my hands on paxlovid my symptoms just weren't that bad, so I was afraid the risk of reinfection or accidentally infecting someone else would outweigh reducing my moderate symptoms.

        I'm genuinely asking in good faith, and probably being a little intellectually lazy by not researching the issue on my own before asking. But I'm just curious if even in that milder case, or in people without exacerbating factors, paxlovid is still considered to be the gold standard of treatment