Coronavirus prep
Replies
-
SuzySunshine99 wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
They will force "essential workers" to be the guinea pigs. Health care workers will be required by their employers to get the vaccine, making them choose between getting a rushed, unproven vaccine and losing their jobs.
Essential workers or disposable workers? Blurred lines.
Heh, right. No, I'm guessing it will even be doctors, nurses, police, fire, and paramedics who are not considered so "disposable". My sister is a doctor, and she is required to get a flu shot, chicken pox vaccine, and other immunizations as needed or she is not allowed in the hospital. They will add this vaccine to the list for sure, even before trials are complete.5 -
SuzySunshine99 wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
They will force "essential workers" to be the guinea pigs. Health care workers will be required by their employers to get the vaccine, making them choose between getting a rushed, unproven vaccine and losing their jobs.
The good thing is that criticism of the early release is strong and they can't force companies to force their workers to get it. Ridiculous that we have to rely on that though.
****
Once phase 3 trials have been completed and reviewed, I will happily be one of the first to get it, but not before that. Most of the researchers I follow say they are very confident in the safety of these vaccines currently in phase 3, but regardless you wait for the entire phase to run its course. They seem to think best case scenario that is mid spring when they might be ready to start roll out. And it will take a good amount of time to get everyone whose willing vaccinated, probably more than a year.
This idea that as soon as the trial period is over everyone just magically gets jabbed is a fantasy. The trial data needs to be crunched and then you need not just vaccine, but equipment, manpower, and time to administer. I also believe the expectation is that any of the vaccines in phase 3 will require more than one shot. Creating this false idea that it's almost over is so damaging.9 -
SuzySunshine99 wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
They will force "essential workers" to be the guinea pigs. Health care workers will be required by their employers to get the vaccine, making them choose between getting a rushed, unproven vaccine and losing their jobs.
The good thing is that criticism of the early release is strong and they can't force companies to force their workers to get it. Ridiculous that we have to rely on that though.
****
Once phase 3 trials have been completed and reviewed, I will happily be one of the first to get it, but not before that. Most of the researchers I follow say they are very confident in the safety of these vaccines currently in phase 3, but regardless you wait for the entire phase to run its course. They seem to think best case scenario that is mid spring when they might be ready to start roll out. And it will take a good amount of time to get everyone whose willing vaccinated, probably more than a year.
This idea that as soon as the trial period is over everyone just magically gets jabbed is a fantasy. The trial data needs to be crunched and then you need not just vaccine, but equipment, manpower, and time to administer. I also believe the expectation is that any of the vaccines in phase 3 will require more than one shot. Creating this false idea that it's almost over is so damaging.
Exactly. I'm certainly not anti-vaccine and some of these vaccines do look safe and potentially viable, at least in the short term. And they have already bypassed animal testing (something I'm not fond of anyway because there are many AI and Machine Learning tools now that make animal testing obsolete), gone ahead with human trials and spent vast resources on it.
Up till now, overall, I've been fine with the way the Feds have handled pushing vaccine R&D. It's actually about the only good thing they've done, aside from financial support for businesses.
But this is outrageous. You don't bypass phase 3 trials, the most important. That would be essentially making everyone guinea pigs, without their consent.
Worse to me, by far, is the damage that it would do to the public trust in vaccines, which is already tenuous at best -- not for the same reasons, but this would not help. The completely wild thing, though, that might happen is the same folks saying Bill Gates and Fauci were behind some wild conspiracy would be first in line if a top down support for the vaccine was pushed via the CDC to have everyone (or at least first responders) vaccinated before November's election so that a "Mission Accomplished" slogan can be messaged out to the general public.4 -
Damage to the public trust is what disturbs me most. Pick a category -- public health, law enforcement, electoral processes, environmental protection, international cooperation..... trust is low for pretty good reasons, IMHO. The reasons keep coming. Trust takes a long time to rebuild. It's hard to see light at the end of this tunnel.9
-
Agreed about the public trust. There are plenty of people who are on the fence and could easily be pushed to distrust the whole process if the govt pushes too hard. It will just give credence to the conspiracy theories.
My current glimmer of optimism is these quick saliva tests. It would be awesome if say right before christmas everyone who would normally get together could just quarantine for a week and then take a couple of saliva tests a couple of days apart and then all gather for the holiday with limited risk. It's probably a pipe dream, but a girl can dream.5 -
missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
Well, a phase 3 trial by definition is going to involve literally thousands of people who (I hope, as is typical) have volunteered to take the vaccine before phase 3 trials are complete. The Moderna trial is hoping to enroll 30,000 subjects **.
I am NOT supporting general release of these vaccines before phase 3 trials are complete. NOT. I don't.
But people *would* volunteer, because they're doing it now, for the trial. And I appreciate that they're doing so, for the trial. It's brave and generous. (Keep in mind that half won't even get the vaccine, and won't know they didn't, at least not until much later. Still brave and generous.)
I'm sure some others would volunteer to take a vaccine outside of the trial, before phase 3 is complete, either out of their fears balancing that way, or having looked in a knowledgeable way at phase 2 and made a bet.
I heard a radio interview (NPR) with an expert (IIRC an epidemiologist or virologist, but definitely someone with sound credentials) saying that it's reasonable to expect the phase 3 trials for this vaccine to go quicker than for some other vaccines.
There are various aspects to this, but one is pretty easy to understand: In phase 3, you give the vaccine to a large number of people, then they go about their lives. The researchers wait around to see what happens, looking for statistically significant differences to accumulate between the actually vaccinated and the ones who got placebo, in who comes down with the disease eventually. When the disease is pretty uncommon, or only moderately contagious, this is slooooooowww. But Covid-19 is quite widespread, and quite contagious - kind of the definition of a pandemic, innit? So, more people in the trial who are going to get sick will do so sooner, and the statistics will accumulate faster. That's one reason we could see a *speedier* phase 3, completely compatible with an *effective* stage 3 trial.
Repeating: I'm not saying we should shortcut stage 3 trials. NopeNopeNope. But it may be rational to expect them to be shorter than some previous stage 3 vaccine trials - not necessarily or inherently a sign of corners being cut.
** Source:https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/phase-3-clinical-trial-investigational-vaccine-covid-19-begins8 -
missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
They won’t have to get your signature if there’s federal legislation granting them immunity from liability.3 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
They won’t have to get your signature if there’s federal legislation granting them immunity from liability.
Of course there is. We wouldn’t want to bankrupt big pharmaceutical.
@AnnPT77 what incentive is given to the brave volunteers?1 -
missysippy930 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
They won’t have to get your signature if there’s federal legislation granting them immunity from liability.
Of course there is. We wouldn’t want to bankrupt big pharmaceutical.
@AnnPT77 what incentive is given to the brave volunteers?
As in most drug or vaccine trials, the volunteers are paid, although not a huge amount...it's just meant to cover your time and travel.
At least in interviews I have seen, the volunteers are hoping to help get a safe vaccine on the market as soon as possible. So, their incentive really is to help others.
The biggest problem seems to be getting people of different demographics to participate. Here, there are ads begging for Black and Latino volunteers so they can get results from a broader racial makeup.7 -
I know someone who is taking part in the trials. He just had his second shot. They plan to follow up regularly for a couple of years, to make sure there are no long serious term side effects.7
-
missysippy930 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
They won’t have to get your signature if there’s federal legislation granting them immunity from liability.
Of course there is. We wouldn’t want to bankrupt big pharmaceutical.
@AnnPT77 what incentive is given to the brave volunteers?
I signed up but wasn't contacted. I'm honestly not sure what if anything I would be paid. Just wanted to help. Practically everyone I know online in the medical and science research fields were volunteering, lots of young people too. Sounds to me like the big reasons were either wanting to help somehow, or being confident in the process that's gone into developing these vaccines and wanting a 50-50 shot at early immunity.8 -
missysippy930 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »missysippy930 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
Who’s going to volunteer to have the vaccine, without trial completions? Are the drug companies going to make people sign waivers guaranteeing that they will not sue in the likely event of issues over obtaining the vaccine that has not completed trials? No thank you. I’ll continue social distancing etc.
They won’t have to get your signature if there’s federal legislation granting them immunity from liability.
Of course there is. We wouldn’t want to bankrupt big pharmaceutical.
@AnnPT77 what incentive is given to the brave volunteers?
The linked article links to the actual call for volunteers: Perhaps it says? (I don't feel like taking the time to research the question, because I don't much care, feeling informed enough bedause I'm loosely familiar with how trials work in another context. I admit I've casually considered volunteering for the Moderna trial, because according to a news report, they're looking to enroll people at higher risk for death from Covid. I'm 64, and have mild COPD, so I might be a candidate. I admit to some fear, this early in the process, but laziness and procrastination are probably bigger factors in why it won't likely happen, frankly.)
As someone else mentioned, I gather that in general, trials sometimes pay a very small amount. The main motivation of pariticipants is to contribute: Generosity, concern for fellow humans, knowledge of the benefits from scientific progress.
I'm a breast cancer survivor, and know many people who've participated in trials, which are common/frequent in that arena. They sign up, knowing that they will be randomized to a treatment that could be exactly the then-current standard of care (the treatment everyone else who's similar is getting), worse than standard of care (not as effective, so higher odds of death from cancer; or dangerous, as in higher risks of potentially fatal or seriously impairing side effects); or better than current standard of care.
The context is that in treatment of cancer, the medical profession is willing to consider - appropriately, I think - treatments with potentially very bad side effects, if they materially improve survival or bad effects on long-term quality of life/health caused by the cancer itself. These days, the potential benefits from the new treatment are at best small percentages of improvement over standard care. (One of my friends was in a trial that turned out to be no better than standard care, but required her taking a drug that had very unpleasant and life-quality impairing but not severely health-dangerous side effects. . . and she took that drug daily for 5 years, faithfully, because she committed to help, for scientific insight and progress.)
The choices with a vaccine that's gone through phase 1/2 are not typically nearly so stark.
What do the cancer patients receive for taking those trial risks? Usually, closer follow-up and more testing (scans & such) than standard of care, perhaps at reduced cost to them for the extras, plus the small chance that they'll be in a treatment arm that turns out to be a major breakthrough.
Despite people's perceptions of the evil pharma and their nefarious employees, I suspect even this very urgent situation will not have participants at materially higher risk than many, many routine trials do.
People sign up for dangerous professions (soldier?) all the time, in droves, for modest financial compensation, same or less than what they could've gotten doing something much safer. People run into burning buildings to rescue complete strangers, at huge risk to themselves. People join things like the Peace Corps to go somewhere less safe than their comfy developed-world life for nearly no pay. They're brave and generous: Altruistic.
I don't understand why it's hard to imagine people signing up for a vaccine trial, when it's been through phase 1-2. They're brave and generous, they want to help . . . and while there are risks, they're probably not materially worse risks than many of us take in daily life without even giving it a thought.10 -
Thank you. Good explanation, and the volunteers are selfless. Too bad the same can’t be said for the drug companies.
Back in the ‘50’s, when Jonas Salk discovered the polio vaccine, he didn’t patent it. He said, It belongs to the people. Can you patent the sun? It was not patented because, in part, of his reluctance to do so.
Can you imagine big pharma doing that today with a Covid-19 vaccine?6 -
Our local radio station just announced that everyone should get their flu shot early, now or by the end of September or early October to prevent a twindemic. @spiriteagle99 That's bravery on their part. Hope it all works out for them and us.1
-
There was big push for people to get flu vaccine in Australia too (and pneumonia vaccine for eligible people) - and higher numbers of people than usual did so - partly because of added coronavirus risk and partly because last year was a very bad influenza year - this always results in greater vaccination rates the following year
We are in early Spring now - past the peak of flu season - and influenza numbers have been WAY down on usual
Partly because of increased vaccination rates - but mostly because of social isolation, social distancing, masks etc
One small silver lining of the pandemic.9 -
Note: I'm not advocating for a particular candidate and instead keeping this apolitical.
I just sent in my request to vote by mail in the Nov. 3 election. When it is possible to do it by mail instead of going and touching the same pen as everyone else and being around people who probably aren't wearing masks, it's just common sense to avoid that unnecessary risk.
Ever since I found out that this virus relies upon glycoslation of ACE2 receptors to enter cells, which is especially bad for diabetics, I've been trying to be even more careful than before. I once had a choice of either losing vision in one eye or getting a medical procedure with a 50/50 chance of dying. I chose not to get the medical procedure because I would rather be unable to use an eye than take that much chance at death. Ironically, the vision issue spontaneously healed (complicated, but nobody expected this). Anyway, I figure my risk of death if I get Covid is about 1 in 6. This is much higher risk than a healthy person. It's too much risk to take for doing things in person that can just as easily be done from home.23 -
paperpudding wrote: »There was big push for people to get flu vaccine in Australia too (and pneumonia vaccine for eligible people) - and higher numbers of people than usual did so - partly because of added coronavirus risk and partly because last year was a very bad influenza year - this always results in greater vaccination rates the following year
We are in early Spring now - past the peak of flu season - and influenza numbers have been WAY down on usual
Partly because of increased vaccination rates - but mostly because of social isolation, social distancing, masks etc
One small silver lining of the pandemic.
The same kind of thing has been happening here (New Zealand) - this was on last night's evening news:
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/09/covid-19-lockdowns-and-vaccinations-driving-flu-deaths-down.html?fbclid=IwAR01gjgJp5Ce3ABXgVNoUWl9b_Asgho8z8MRqFf7wCB0QilqD0LXmWxNtTo
94% decrease in hospital admission due to influenza compared to last year!
But that also came with advice that if you feel like you are getting the flu, get tested for covid! It's not likely to be influenza right now.1 -
and in Australia (and I presume NZ uses similar nasal swab testing) your result will show you Detected or Not Detected for Covid, Influenza, pertussis, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV - cause of croup)
so testing for covid and testing for influenza is really the same test.
and yes, same here - anyone with any symptoms, no matter how mild - get tested.3 -
Things are picking up COVID-19 in our western end of KY (USA) per rumors since there is a news blackout on specific facts. The university and area schools have many of us on edge. No details yet but rumors are two health care providers have tested positive so they will be closing their offices for two weeks and their staff are to isolate for two weeks. Pro and con Robert E Lee groups are physically engaging at its location on the court square and this has been going on for weeks.
Not sure of the real meaning of the term "Stark Raving Mad" but I an starting to have some ideas about the term.2 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Things are picking up COVID-19 in our western end of KY (USA) per rumors since there is a news blackout on specific facts. The university and area schools have many of us on edge. No details yet but rumors are two health care providers have tested positive so they will be closing their offices for two weeks and their staff are to isolate for two weeks. Pro and con Robert E Lee groups are physically engaging at its location on the court square and this has been going on for weeks.
Not sure of the real meaning of the term "Stark Raving Mad" but I an starting to have some ideas about the term.
What do you mean by "news blackout"?1 -
Interesting. A young lady was in nursing school when school closed due to corona. She got a job in a hospital on the corona ward. School let it count as clinicals and she graduated. She got a job in a local hospital. She was staying with a friend while she rented an apartment, got settled. She tested positive for Corona, so she was off work. After one week she called in, just to check in. She told them she had no symptoms, felt fine, used the time to clean up and finish decorating her apartment. They told her to come on back in to work. No follow up test. She is back at work at the hospital after one week off.5
-
Diatonic12 wrote: »Our local radio station just announced that everyone should get their flu shot early, now or by the end of September or early October to prevent a twindemic. @spiriteagle99 That's bravery on their part. Hope it all works out for them and us.
I don't usually get the flu shot but plan on doing it this year. The only concern I've got with them doing the flu shot early is that normally means they won't be as accurate on which strain is hitting us that year. But they do say it's better to get one even if it's the wrong strain and, I believe, that's likely even more important this year.2 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »Diatonic12 wrote: »Our local radio station just announced that everyone should get their flu shot early, now or by the end of September or early October to prevent a twindemic. @spiriteagle99 That's bravery on their part. Hope it all works out for them and us.
I don't usually get the flu shot but plan on doing it this year. The only concern I've got with them doing the flu shot early is that normally means they won't be as accurate on which strain is hitting us that year. But they do say it's better to get one even if it's the wrong strain and, I believe, that's likely even more important this year.
I am not an expert, but if I understand correctly they didn't choose the strain/vaccination contents early, they're just encouraging us to get it early this year. The timeline for evaluating the evidence and choosing the strains we should be vaccinated against happened in the same timeline has it has for previous years.7 -
@MikePfirrman Agreed. At this point, we're just kinda throwing everything up against the wall and hoping something sticks. You're familiar with my stomping grounds that shall remain a secret...but the seniors always remind us of the Great Depression. What a long siege that must've been with so little food in the house. Lysol and toilet paper were the least of their worries. They keep things in perspective. When they were sick there was little anyone could do for them. Some of my relatives buried in the cemetery were born in 1835 and died in 1860 or 1876. There's many long before that time but living out here with brutal winters and so little to eat, I'm the lucky one.
Mother and I have been walking out there almost every evening. It's the one place we can get away from all of the pesky tourists. I've gotten to know everyone out there and where they are.
3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »Diatonic12 wrote: »Our local radio station just announced that everyone should get their flu shot early, now or by the end of September or early October to prevent a twindemic. @spiriteagle99 That's bravery on their part. Hope it all works out for them and us.
I don't usually get the flu shot but plan on doing it this year. The only concern I've got with them doing the flu shot early is that normally means they won't be as accurate on which strain is hitting us that year. But they do say it's better to get one even if it's the wrong strain and, I believe, that's likely even more important this year.
I am not an expert, but if I understand correctly they didn't choose the strain/vaccination contents early, they're just encouraging us to get it early this year. The timeline for evaluating the evidence and choosing the strains we should be vaccinated against happened in the same timeline has it has for previous years.
That's good to know. I usually don't get the flu shot. Not that I don't believe in it, but I'm normally too lazy to do it. This year I plan on it. Found this today. Looks like a nice summary to me.
For those that get freaked out by Formaldehyde, your body produces something very similar to it when you drink alcohol and has certain levels of it anyway. Quick tip, get some molybdenum and keep it around for nights you drink more than one drink. It's a simple mineral that metabolizes (breaks down) most of the dehydes (of which the thing that makes you feel like garbage when you have hangovers -- acetyldehyde) into harmless enzymes so your body can get rid of them. I'll take one the day of my shot. I also keep them around in the rare case I drink more than two drinks when I go out.
https://www.fatherly.com/health-science/flu-shot-ingredients-flu-vaccine/
1 -
We haven’t done flu shots for several years - a combination of bad reactions for both my husband and mom in the same year, two children with allergies (one that had a horrendous reaction to a routine vax... irked that even though her doctor said she could never have a booster they have it in her records that “mom refused” when it was due
)... just hard trying to weigh the options after those rocky couple of years. I know we need to this year, but it makes me nervous. I am not anti-vax by any means, just gun shy from experience. 3 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »Diatonic12 wrote: »Our local radio station just announced that everyone should get their flu shot early, now or by the end of September or early October to prevent a twindemic. @spiriteagle99 That's bravery on their part. Hope it all works out for them and us.
I don't usually get the flu shot but plan on doing it this year. The only concern I've got with them doing the flu shot early is that normally means they won't be as accurate on which strain is hitting us that year. But they do say it's better to get one even if it's the wrong strain and, I believe, that's likely even more important this year.
I usually wait to get mine, too, but not because the shot is updated during the season (never heard of that - do pharma companies do that?) but because the protection lasts longer in younger people. I'm 55, so I wait until I need more protection (usually right before the holidays). Flu season is usually worse after the holidays than before the holidays in my area, so getting the shot early risks losing efficacy while the flu season is peaking.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »Diatonic12 wrote: »Our local radio station just announced that everyone should get their flu shot early, now or by the end of September or early October to prevent a twindemic. @spiriteagle99 That's bravery on their part. Hope it all works out for them and us.
I don't usually get the flu shot but plan on doing it this year. The only concern I've got with them doing the flu shot early is that normally means they won't be as accurate on which strain is hitting us that year. But they do say it's better to get one even if it's the wrong strain and, I believe, that's likely even more important this year.
I am not an expert, but if I understand correctly they didn't choose the strain/vaccination contents early, they're just encouraging us to get it early this year. The timeline for evaluating the evidence and choosing the strains we should be vaccinated against happened in the same timeline has it has for previous years.
For the Northern hemisphere, IMU, there's a February conference where flu strains are selected for the next season's vaccines. (September conference for Southern hemisphere.) CDC says it takes around 6 months to produce the vaccines, but some companies start growing strains in January based on expectations. However, it's normally encouraged not to get the vaccine super early (like July) because benefits decline after 4-6 months especially for older folks.
Sounds like they're trying to get more of us vaccinated in the optimal time range this year, vs. procrastinating until season starts.
Sources:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-selection.htm
https://www.health.harvard.edu/vaccinations/whats-the-best-time-of-year-for-a-flu-shot6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »Diatonic12 wrote: »Our local radio station just announced that everyone should get their flu shot early, now or by the end of September or early October to prevent a twindemic. @spiriteagle99 That's bravery on their part. Hope it all works out for them and us.
I don't usually get the flu shot but plan on doing it this year. The only concern I've got with them doing the flu shot early is that normally means they won't be as accurate on which strain is hitting us that year. But they do say it's better to get one even if it's the wrong strain and, I believe, that's likely even more important this year.
I am not an expert, but if I understand correctly they didn't choose the strain/vaccination contents early, they're just encouraging us to get it early this year. The timeline for evaluating the evidence and choosing the strains we should be vaccinated against happened in the same timeline has it has for previous years.
For the Northern hemisphere, IMU, there's a February conference where flu strains are selected for the next season's vaccines. (September conference for Southern hemisphere.) CDC says it takes around 6 months to produce the vaccines, but some companies start growing strains in January based on expectations. However, it's normally encouraged not to get the vaccine super early (like July) because benefits decline after 4-6 months especially for older folks.
Sounds like they're trying to get more of us vaccinated in the optimal time range this year, vs. procrastinating until season starts.
Sources:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-selection.htm
https://www.health.harvard.edu/vaccinations/whats-the-best-time-of-year-for-a-flu-shot
Thank you - I just knew somebody would have the details on this!1 -
We JUST got vaccinated this last week.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions