Coronavirus prep
Replies
-
paperpudding wrote: »I was expecting to wait awhile before I was even eligible for the vaccine, feeling kind of okay with that because I would rather see how side effects play out. But I received a note in the mail today, because I help care for my BIL I'm eligible for the vaccine now and need to call our local hospital by the 20th to set up an appt.
The 1st shot doesn't scare me but the 2nd one does, only because I've heard people get worse reactions with that one.
I'm 67, pretty healthy as far as it all goes, had Covid(Blessedly mild) back around Thanksgiving but just not knowing how it'll affect me leaves me apprehensive.
Any encouraging words to offer?
Thank you!!
Reenie, have you gotten the shingles vaccine? I have to say, after listening to conversations about vaccines for the last month or two, I am looking forward to the covid vaccines and kind of scared of the shingles one!
In my work, I have given hundreds of shingles vaccines - no more reactions than any other vaccine.
As with all vaccines some people get sore arm and /or redness and swelling.
But doesn't seem any more so than any other vaccine.
It is a live vaccine though so some people cannot have it.
Who should not have the shingles vaccine? Curious
0 -
corinasue1143 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »I was expecting to wait awhile before I was even eligible for the vaccine, feeling kind of okay with that because I would rather see how side effects play out. But I received a note in the mail today, because I help care for my BIL I'm eligible for the vaccine now and need to call our local hospital by the 20th to set up an appt.
The 1st shot doesn't scare me but the 2nd one does, only because I've heard people get worse reactions with that one.
I'm 67, pretty healthy as far as it all goes, had Covid(Blessedly mild) back around Thanksgiving but just not knowing how it'll affect me leaves me apprehensive.
Any encouraging words to offer?
Thank you!!
Reenie, have you gotten the shingles vaccine? I have to say, after listening to conversations about vaccines for the last month or two, I am looking forward to the covid vaccines and kind of scared of the shingles one!
In my work, I have given hundreds of shingles vaccines - no more reactions than any other vaccine.
As with all vaccines some people get sore arm and /or redness and swelling.
But doesn't seem any more so than any other vaccine.
It is a live vaccine though so some people cannot have it.
Who should not have the shingles vaccine? Curious
It is a live vaccine -so same as any live vaccines (eg MMR) people with suppressed immunity should not have it- ie those on immunosuppressant meds such as chemotherapy,organ transplant reciprients, people on dialysis, people with HIV, those on some heavy duty meds for other conditions eg methotrexate.
also pregnant women - but since Zostavax only approved for people over 50, this isnt usually an issue.9 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »@kshama2001 and @cwolfman13 I respect both your replies pointing out how the surgeon general is part of an administration and is therefore not apolitical. But, the other part of the original comment, which I also addressed, was how the 15 days to slow the spread did not "come from Fauci". As I quoted above, at the same approximate point in time, Fauci was stating "several weeks". In the overcall experience we have had, the 15 days of the surgeon general vs the several weeks stated by Fauci were equally wrong.
One of the big issues here is that we weren't even able to see what two weeks or several weeks of an actual lockdown would do. Everything was left to individual states. There were states who never shut anything down at all...others put in minimal restrictions...others shut down, but very quickly opened everything back up to almost normal. That's like having a special area of the swimming pool that it's ok to pee in. The only way anything like two weeks or several weeks would have worked is if everyone was on the same page and doing the same thing. This is pretty evident just by observing other countries that have effectively controlled the virus.
Also, if you remember back to March and the two week plan or the CDC and Fauci saying it would be longer...part of all of that was slow, phased opening up...which should have also been an indication to people that restrictions would go on considerably longer. Honestly, if anyone legitimately thought it would be a couple of weeks or several weeks and then we'd just be back to pre COVID life, I would have to question if they were actually paying attention to what was happening in the world around them.
There wasn't even a phased opening in many states...and even more states that were opening in phases, but not really following any kind of guideline as to what should or would be open in any given phase of re-opening.
There is a reason that the USA leads the world in COVID positivity rates...there is a reason other countries have been able to control the virus...
While all valid, my original post was simply in response to someone (don't recall who) stating that they never heard any two weeks statement, so I showed the surgeon general and the 15 days to slow the spread announced last March to show that there was something (not whether it was good or bad).
Then people said, well that statement was not from a scientist like Fauci. So I showed Fauci said fairly similar around the same time. My posts all have roots in the single original comment about never hearing of a "two week" plan.
It was 2 weeks to "slow the spread" not END the spread. We were supposed to be flattening the curve so resources would not be overwhelmed by a sudden, massive spike of infections. It was supposed to give us time to prepare for the coming onslaught. Although the time seemed to be squandered... Did anyone really say or even think it would be over in 2 weeks?
The only person telling us it would magically completely disappear soon was the president. I can see how people who believed his statements would be disappointed when the pandemic kept going...
I'm not sure you can say that Fauci's comment was "equally wrong" since he said it would be several weeks with restrictions in place to get things under control. Since we never actually had anything consistent and coordinated in place, we can't actually know if he would have been right or wrong. We never did the things he told us we needed to do.
And if you back and read the Fauci quotes in this thread, making sure to read all the text around what was bolded, he was actually saying "at least several weeks" and "several weeks or longer."10 -
Thanks!0
-
I'll get the vaccine when my turn comes, but I can't say I'm too unhappy about being in the last priority (general public) group, because going into an enclosed space with dozens or scores of people lined up and waiting will be pretty much the highest-risk thing I've done since the pandemic began, except maybe for giving blood, but I'm expecting the waiting areas for the vaccine to have a lot more people in them than a blood drive. I'm not eager for the irony of getting covid while waiting in line for the vaccine.
Hopefully by the time my turn comes, we won't be in a surge, we won't be facing a brand new mutation that is creating greater transmission, and the effect of all the earlier priority groups getting vaccinated will be tamping down on the spread (assuming that at least some of the vaccines limit the recipients' ability to spread the vaccine).6 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »I'll get the vaccine when my turn comes, but I can't say I'm too unhappy about being in the last priority (general public) group, because going into an enclosed space with dozens or scores of people lined up and waiting will be pretty much the highest-risk thing I've done since the pandemic began, except maybe for giving blood, but I'm expecting the waiting areas for the vaccine to have a lot more people in them than a blood drive. I'm not eager for the irony of getting covid while waiting in line for the vaccine.
Hopefully by the time my turn comes, we won't be in a surge, we won't be facing a brand new mutation that is creating greater transmission, and the effect of all the earlier priority groups getting vaccinated will be tamping down on the spread (assuming that at least some of the vaccines limit the recipients' ability to spread the vaccine).
And hopefully by the time your turn comes the roll out will be smoother, too. They just opened up the next tier here in Southern California. My husband and sister are both "frontline essential workers." Within the first hour or two of opening appointments they were completely filled. My sister got one right before the system was overwhelmed. My husband wasn't able to get one and he tried within 15 minutes of her. None of his co-workers managed to snag one either. Apparently the rest of the month is already booked solid.
And yet they keep putting out news stories telling people it's their turn and it's time to sign up. That's going to cause unnecessary frustration when people are told it's their turn and then it turns out they can't get it.
There's HUGE demand here. People want it. Not sure if it's a supply problem or if they just don't have the logistics down (staff and venues) for actually getting it out there.
This newest tier was supposed to be frontline essential people and 75+. There aren't as many 75+ people as other age groups, so that would have allowed the more vulnerable elderly group in the general population to squeeze in earlier and also get all those frontline workers covered.
But they decided to open it up to 65+ and were almost instantly swamped. 65+ is a much larger population group than 75+. Way too many people at one time for them to handle...now it's just a real patchwork of people getting it...and more frontline and 75+ people NOT getting it than getting it.
I guess we'll just see how this goes...5 -
@kshama2001 and @cwolfman13 I respect both your replies pointing out how the surgeon general is part of an administration and is therefore not apolitical. But, the other part of the original comment, which I also addressed, was how the 15 days to slow the spread did not "come from Fauci". As I quoted above, at the same approximate point in time, Fauci was stating "several weeks". In the overcall experience we have had, the 15 days of the surgeon general vs the several weeks stated by Fauci were equally wrong.
I agree we were told several weeks, and thought that would be the case if people complied (as it was in AU and NZ, for example). For various reasons that did not work. But "several weeks" is quite different from "2 weeks" and "several weeks" is what I recall. I'm frustrated there was not better compliance, as I do think several weeks would have been sufficient with good compliance (see AU).
A perfect example of Australian compliance and restrictions took place in my part of Australia last week. We had one COVID positive result in a woman who was a cleaner in a COVID quarantine hotel. Our state government's response was to enforce a three-day lockdown (Sat, Sun, Mon with less than 12 hours notice) with the possibility of extension once extensive testing took place in the areas this woman had visited. Other than her partner, not one other person has contracted the virus from her (as far as we know). Our state government has enforced mask-wearing in all public enclosed places for a further 10 days and we continue to have zero new community cases each day. We in Australia understand that, in our current, overall very good position, occasional lockdowns are accepted and followed because it has been proven to work.16 -
I was expecting to wait awhile before I was even eligible for the vaccine, feeling kind of okay with that because I would rather see how side effects play out. But I received a note in the mail today, because I help care for my BIL I'm eligible for the vaccine now and need to call our local hospital by the 20th to set up an appt.
The 1st shot doesn't scare me but the 2nd one does, only because I've heard people get worse reactions with that one.
I'm 67, pretty healthy as far as it all goes, had Covid(Blessedly mild) back around Thanksgiving but just not knowing how it'll affect me leaves me apprehensive.
Any encouraging words to offer?
Thank you!!
Reenie, have you gotten the shingles vaccine? I have to say, after listening to conversations about vaccines for the last month or two, I am looking forward to the covid vaccines and kind of scared of the shingles one!
Last winter I had 4 shots, the flu, shingles and pneumonia; one required a 2nd shot but can't remember which one it was.
I felt kind of icky the next day, nothing debilitating, just wanted to sleep it off.. but unfortunately having had so many shots I honestly couldn't tell you which 1 it was. I've never had a reaction more than a sore arm from any injection before.
I know my dad had Shingles and it wasn't fun so even if the injection has a side affect, it's worth it.
I've now heard if you've had Covid then the Covid vaccine is worst with the 1st one, if you haven't had Covid the 2nd injection will give you a bigger effect. Everything is so darn confusing about all of it.
I visit another forum where Covid vaccine is a big topic and someone reported knowing 7 people that have been vaccinated so far. Five with sore arms, 1had flu like symptoms for a weekend but the 7th was hospitalized with breathing issues but is a person with 22 yrs. under his belt of smoker's lungs. 1 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »@kshama2001 and @cwolfman13 I respect both your replies pointing out how the surgeon general is part of an administration and is therefore not apolitical. But, the other part of the original comment, which I also addressed, was how the 15 days to slow the spread did not "come from Fauci". As I quoted above, at the same approximate point in time, Fauci was stating "several weeks". In the overcall experience we have had, the 15 days of the surgeon general vs the several weeks stated by Fauci were equally wrong.
One of the big issues here is that we weren't even able to see what two weeks or several weeks of an actual lockdown would do. Everything was left to individual states. There were states who never shut anything down at all...others put in minimal restrictions...others shut down, but very quickly opened everything back up to almost normal. That's like having a special area of the swimming pool that it's ok to pee in. The only way anything like two weeks or several weeks would have worked is if everyone was on the same page and doing the same thing. This is pretty evident just by observing other countries that have effectively controlled the virus.
Also, if you remember back to March and the two week plan or the CDC and Fauci saying it would be longer...part of all of that was slow, phased opening up...which should have also been an indication to people that restrictions would go on considerably longer. Honestly, if anyone legitimately thought it would be a couple of weeks or several weeks and then we'd just be back to pre COVID life, I would have to question if they were actually paying attention to what was happening in the world around them.
There wasn't even a phased opening in many states...and even more states that were opening in phases, but not really following any kind of guideline as to what should or would be open in any given phase of re-opening.
There is a reason that the USA leads the world in COVID positivity rates...there is a reason other countries have been able to control the virus...
While all valid, my original post was simply in response to someone (don't recall who) stating that they never heard any two weeks statement, so I showed the surgeon general and the 15 days to slow the spread announced last March to show that there was something (not whether it was good or bad).
Then people said, well that statement was not from a scientist like Fauci. So I showed Fauci said fairly similar around the same time. My posts all have roots in the single original comment about never hearing of a "two week" plan.
It was 2 weeks to "slow the spread" not END the spread. We were supposed to be flattening the curve so resources would not be overwhelmed by a sudden, massive spike of infections. It was supposed to give us time to prepare for the coming onslaught. Although the time seemed to be squandered... Did anyone really say or even think it would be over in 2 weeks?
The only person telling us it would magically completely disappear soon was the president. I can see how people who believed his statements would be disappointed when the pandemic kept going...
I'm not sure you can say that Fauci's comment was "equally wrong" since he said it would be several weeks with restrictions in place to get things under control. Since we never actually had anything consistent and coordinated in place, we can't actually know if he would have been right or wrong. We never did the things he told us we needed to do.
And if you back and read the Fauci quotes in this thread, making sure to read all the text around what was bolded, he was actually saying "at least several weeks" and "several weeks or longer."
True, but if I were have a repair done and the contractor stated servers weeks or longer back mid-March, I would expect it to be complete by some point in May.1 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »@kshama2001 and @cwolfman13 I respect both your replies pointing out how the surgeon general is part of an administration and is therefore not apolitical. But, the other part of the original comment, which I also addressed, was how the 15 days to slow the spread did not "come from Fauci". As I quoted above, at the same approximate point in time, Fauci was stating "several weeks". In the overcall experience we have had, the 15 days of the surgeon general vs the several weeks stated by Fauci were equally wrong.
One of the big issues here is that we weren't even able to see what two weeks or several weeks of an actual lockdown would do. Everything was left to individual states. There were states who never shut anything down at all...others put in minimal restrictions...others shut down, but very quickly opened everything back up to almost normal. That's like having a special area of the swimming pool that it's ok to pee in. The only way anything like two weeks or several weeks would have worked is if everyone was on the same page and doing the same thing. This is pretty evident just by observing other countries that have effectively controlled the virus.
Also, if you remember back to March and the two week plan or the CDC and Fauci saying it would be longer...part of all of that was slow, phased opening up...which should have also been an indication to people that restrictions would go on considerably longer. Honestly, if anyone legitimately thought it would be a couple of weeks or several weeks and then we'd just be back to pre COVID life, I would have to question if they were actually paying attention to what was happening in the world around them.
There wasn't even a phased opening in many states...and even more states that were opening in phases, but not really following any kind of guideline as to what should or would be open in any given phase of re-opening.
There is a reason that the USA leads the world in COVID positivity rates...there is a reason other countries have been able to control the virus...
While all valid, my original post was simply in response to someone (don't recall who) stating that they never heard any two weeks statement, so I showed the surgeon general and the 15 days to slow the spread announced last March to show that there was something (not whether it was good or bad).
Then people said, well that statement was not from a scientist like Fauci. So I showed Fauci said fairly similar around the same time. My posts all have roots in the single original comment about never hearing of a "two week" plan.
It was 2 weeks to "slow the spread" not END the spread. We were supposed to be flattening the curve so resources would not be overwhelmed by a sudden, massive spike of infections. It was supposed to give us time to prepare for the coming onslaught. Although the time seemed to be squandered... Did anyone really say or even think it would be over in 2 weeks?
The only person telling us it would magically completely disappear soon was the president. I can see how people who believed his statements would be disappointed when the pandemic kept going...
I'm not sure you can say that Fauci's comment was "equally wrong" since he said it would be several weeks with restrictions in place to get things under control. Since we never actually had anything consistent and coordinated in place, we can't actually know if he would have been right or wrong. We never did the things he told us we needed to do.
And if you back and read the Fauci quotes in this thread, making sure to read all the text around what was bolded, he was actually saying "at least several weeks" and "several weeks or longer."
True, but if I were have a repair done and the contractor stated servers weeks or longer back mid-March, I would expect it to be complete by some point in May.
Unfortunately, 'in these times', yes those dreaded words again, it doesn't happen like it used to. We just had a bathroom reno, looking at replacing some windows and possibly redoing our kitchen, so I've heard this estimate of time several times now.
I'm sure it's much more so with anything that dares to be promised about Covid. 3 -
I was expecting to wait awhile before I was even eligible for the vaccine, feeling kind of okay with that because I would rather see how side effects play out. But I received a note in the mail today, because I help care for my BIL I'm eligible for the vaccine now and need to call our local hospital by the 20th to set up an appt.
The 1st shot doesn't scare me but the 2nd one does, only because I've heard people get worse reactions with that one.
I'm 67, pretty healthy as far as it all goes, had Covid(Blessedly mild) back around Thanksgiving but just not knowing how it'll affect me leaves me apprehensive.
Any encouraging words to offer?
Thank you!!
Reenie, have you gotten the shingles vaccine? I have to say, after listening to conversations about vaccines for the last month or two, I am looking forward to the covid vaccines and kind of scared of the shingles one!
Last winter I had 4 shots, the flu, shingles and pneumonia; one required a 2nd shot but can't remember which one it was. I felt kind of icky the next day, nothing debilitating, just wanted to sleep it off.. but unfortunately having had so many shots I honestly couldn't tell you which 1 it was. I've never had a reaction more than a sore arm from any injection before.
I know my dad had Shingles and it wasn't fun so even if the injection has a side affect, it's worth it.
I've now heard if you've had Covid then the Covid vaccine is worst with the 1st one, if you haven't had Covid the 2nd injection will give you a bigger effect. Everything is so darn confusing about all of it. I visit another forum where Covid vaccine is a big topic and someone reported knowing 7 people that have been vaccinated so far. Five with sore arms, 1had flu like symptoms for a weekend but the 7th was hospitalized with breathing issues but is a person with 22 yrs. under his belt of smoker's lungs.
Shingles requires a second shot. A coworker had a sever reaction to the shingles vaccine and was hospitalized. My husband has had both shingles shots with no reaction. I’m really torn about the shingles vaccine.2 -
paperpudding wrote: »corinasue1143 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »I was expecting to wait awhile before I was even eligible for the vaccine, feeling kind of okay with that because I would rather see how side effects play out. But I received a note in the mail today, because I help care for my BIL I'm eligible for the vaccine now and need to call our local hospital by the 20th to set up an appt.
The 1st shot doesn't scare me but the 2nd one does, only because I've heard people get worse reactions with that one.
I'm 67, pretty healthy as far as it all goes, had Covid(Blessedly mild) back around Thanksgiving but just not knowing how it'll affect me leaves me apprehensive.
Any encouraging words to offer?
Thank you!!
Reenie, have you gotten the shingles vaccine? I have to say, after listening to conversations about vaccines for the last month or two, I am looking forward to the covid vaccines and kind of scared of the shingles one!
In my work, I have given hundreds of shingles vaccines - no more reactions than any other vaccine.
As with all vaccines some people get sore arm and /or redness and swelling.
But doesn't seem any more so than any other vaccine.
It is a live vaccine though so some people cannot have it.
Who should not have the shingles vaccine? Curious
It is a live vaccine -so same as any live vaccines (eg MMR) people with suppressed immunity should not have it- ie those on immunosuppressant meds such as chemotherapy,organ transplant reciprients, people on dialysis, people with HIV, those on some heavy duty meds for other conditions eg methotrexate.
also pregnant women - but since Zostavax only approved for people over 50, this isnt usually an issue.
Actually, Zostavax just got discontinued in the US (don't know about elsewhere) - Shingrix is the one being given.
https://www.singlecare.com/blog/shingrix-vs-zostavax/
https://www.cdc.gov/shingles/vaccination.html3 -
I had the (shingrix) shingle vaccine and booster almost two years ago and had a bad reaction to the booster. I, since then, was diagnosed with polymyalgia and was put on prednisone. Under my doctor’s care, we tried twice to tapering off the prednisone very slowly but this thing keeps coming back. This polymyalgia crap feels like I am walking through neck deep in cold wet cement It takes a few weeks to get back to feeling a little better after I get back on prednisone.
I also take methotrexate and humira to mange my rheumatoid arthritis which has been under control for many years. That is probably why I had a reaction.
My sister almost lost her vision to shingles, that is why I got the vaccine in the first place. It’s a catch 22.15 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »@kshama2001 and @cwolfman13 I respect both your replies pointing out how the surgeon general is part of an administration and is therefore not apolitical. But, the other part of the original comment, which I also addressed, was how the 15 days to slow the spread did not "come from Fauci". As I quoted above, at the same approximate point in time, Fauci was stating "several weeks". In the overcall experience we have had, the 15 days of the surgeon general vs the several weeks stated by Fauci were equally wrong.
One of the big issues here is that we weren't even able to see what two weeks or several weeks of an actual lockdown would do. Everything was left to individual states. There were states who never shut anything down at all...others put in minimal restrictions...others shut down, but very quickly opened everything back up to almost normal. That's like having a special area of the swimming pool that it's ok to pee in. The only way anything like two weeks or several weeks would have worked is if everyone was on the same page and doing the same thing. This is pretty evident just by observing other countries that have effectively controlled the virus.
Also, if you remember back to March and the two week plan or the CDC and Fauci saying it would be longer...part of all of that was slow, phased opening up...which should have also been an indication to people that restrictions would go on considerably longer. Honestly, if anyone legitimately thought it would be a couple of weeks or several weeks and then we'd just be back to pre COVID life, I would have to question if they were actually paying attention to what was happening in the world around them.
There wasn't even a phased opening in many states...and even more states that were opening in phases, but not really following any kind of guideline as to what should or would be open in any given phase of re-opening.
There is a reason that the USA leads the world in COVID positivity rates...there is a reason other countries have been able to control the virus...
While all valid, my original post was simply in response to someone (don't recall who) stating that they never heard any two weeks statement, so I showed the surgeon general and the 15 days to slow the spread announced last March to show that there was something (not whether it was good or bad).
Then people said, well that statement was not from a scientist like Fauci. So I showed Fauci said fairly similar around the same time. My posts all have roots in the single original comment about never hearing of a "two week" plan.
It was 2 weeks to "slow the spread" not END the spread. We were supposed to be flattening the curve so resources would not be overwhelmed by a sudden, massive spike of infections. It was supposed to give us time to prepare for the coming onslaught. Although the time seemed to be squandered... Did anyone really say or even think it would be over in 2 weeks?
The only person telling us it would magically completely disappear soon was the president. I can see how people who believed his statements would be disappointed when the pandemic kept going...
I'm not sure you can say that Fauci's comment was "equally wrong" since he said it would be several weeks with restrictions in place to get things under control. Since we never actually had anything consistent and coordinated in place, we can't actually know if he would have been right or wrong. We never did the things he told us we needed to do.
And if you back and read the Fauci quotes in this thread, making sure to read all the text around what was bolded, he was actually saying "at least several weeks" and "several weeks or longer."
True, but if I were have a repair done and the contractor stated servers weeks or longer back mid-March, I would expect it to be complete by some point in May.
But it wouldn't be the first time the contractor had seen that project before and they would've been able to see your budget, plans, and home before estimating a time frame. They'd be able to talk to you directly without having their plan and priorities filtered through the government, press, and social media. And they wouldn't have to worry about you getting in their way the whole time, stealing their tools, and sometimes refusing to let them into your house while having parties that broke apart work they'd already completed.14 -
Wow, if I'd heard these experiences before taking the shingles vaccine, I might've given it more of a maybe, maybe not. Still, since mostly likely it was the shingles that I reacted to, the amount of reaction I had, I'd take it again. Just wish we knew how our unique physical make-up is going to react to something before we commit. The not-knowing is scary.6
-
lynn_glenmont wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »@kshama2001 and @cwolfman13 I respect both your replies pointing out how the surgeon general is part of an administration and is therefore not apolitical. But, the other part of the original comment, which I also addressed, was how the 15 days to slow the spread did not "come from Fauci". As I quoted above, at the same approximate point in time, Fauci was stating "several weeks". In the overcall experience we have had, the 15 days of the surgeon general vs the several weeks stated by Fauci were equally wrong.
One of the big issues here is that we weren't even able to see what two weeks or several weeks of an actual lockdown would do. Everything was left to individual states. There were states who never shut anything down at all...others put in minimal restrictions...others shut down, but very quickly opened everything back up to almost normal. That's like having a special area of the swimming pool that it's ok to pee in. The only way anything like two weeks or several weeks would have worked is if everyone was on the same page and doing the same thing. This is pretty evident just by observing other countries that have effectively controlled the virus.
Also, if you remember back to March and the two week plan or the CDC and Fauci saying it would be longer...part of all of that was slow, phased opening up...which should have also been an indication to people that restrictions would go on considerably longer. Honestly, if anyone legitimately thought it would be a couple of weeks or several weeks and then we'd just be back to pre COVID life, I would have to question if they were actually paying attention to what was happening in the world around them.
There wasn't even a phased opening in many states...and even more states that were opening in phases, but not really following any kind of guideline as to what should or would be open in any given phase of re-opening.
There is a reason that the USA leads the world in COVID positivity rates...there is a reason other countries have been able to control the virus...
While all valid, my original post was simply in response to someone (don't recall who) stating that they never heard any two weeks statement, so I showed the surgeon general and the 15 days to slow the spread announced last March to show that there was something (not whether it was good or bad).
Then people said, well that statement was not from a scientist like Fauci. So I showed Fauci said fairly similar around the same time. My posts all have roots in the single original comment about never hearing of a "two week" plan.
It was 2 weeks to "slow the spread" not END the spread. We were supposed to be flattening the curve so resources would not be overwhelmed by a sudden, massive spike of infections. It was supposed to give us time to prepare for the coming onslaught. Although the time seemed to be squandered... Did anyone really say or even think it would be over in 2 weeks?
The only person telling us it would magically completely disappear soon was the president. I can see how people who believed his statements would be disappointed when the pandemic kept going...
I'm not sure you can say that Fauci's comment was "equally wrong" since he said it would be several weeks with restrictions in place to get things under control. Since we never actually had anything consistent and coordinated in place, we can't actually know if he would have been right or wrong. We never did the things he told us we needed to do.
And if you back and read the Fauci quotes in this thread, making sure to read all the text around what was bolded, he was actually saying "at least several weeks" and "several weeks or longer."
True, but if I were have a repair done and the contractor stated servers weeks or longer back mid-March, I would expect it to be complete by some point in May.
You've never worked with contractors. Typical experience over promise and under deliver 😀8 -
With respect to estimates, contractors' or public health authorities':
I had a job that included lots of project management, for somewhat novel products. Completion estimates were very difficult, but everyone wants one, even right up front, when there's very little info about the nature of the work to be done, even.
It's absolutely 100% human nature, near universal, to give an estimate that won't p*ss off those asking. You can't *not* give an estimate, you don't have the info needed to give a real estimate, so you do what keeps people off your back.
Later in career, many of us find out that this is just delaying the slapback, and the results can be worse later, when people think you lied to get the job or something. So, if you can, and not be shot on the spot, up front you make an extremely, extremely long estimate, one you hope to be able to beat. (Humans being optimistic and overconfident, even these estimates sometimes turn out to be too short, but less likely to be of a whole different magnitude, so even if the audience is mad, they may not think you're a scurrilous, intentional liar.) If you do beat the ridiculously long estimate, then people are happy. (Mostly, they forget, and aren't happy regardless. 🤷♀️)
So: IME, estimates made by humans tend to be optimistic, shorter than realistic. If you make the estimate, people will probably be angry at you sooner or later. Angry sooner tends to be less total anger, but it's hard not to do what feels good in the moment, and puts the anger off until the future, when it's worse.
ETA: There's also a tendency for those receiving an estimate to remember any part of what you said that was closer to what they wanted to hear up front. They will then use that partial (sometimes even false) memory to whack you over the head later. Do I sound cynical? Yup.9 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »I'll get the vaccine when my turn comes, but I can't say I'm too unhappy about being in the last priority (general public) group, because going into an enclosed space with dozens or scores of people lined up and waiting will be pretty much the highest-risk thing I've done since the pandemic began, except maybe for giving blood, but I'm expecting the waiting areas for the vaccine to have a lot more people in them than a blood drive. I'm not eager for the irony of getting covid while waiting in line for the vaccine.
Hopefully by the time my turn comes, we won't be in a surge, we won't be facing a brand new mutation that is creating greater transmission, and the effect of all the earlier priority groups getting vaccinated will be tamping down on the spread (assuming that at least some of the vaccines limit the recipients' ability to spread the vaccine).
Maybe it's not happening in your area, but at least some of the local vaccination sites seem to be gearing up for drive-though, so you wait in a *longer* line (in distance, not necessarily number of people), but in your car.
This is true even with our Northern winters (freezing temps, so 32 +/- 10, daytimes, right now, but can go to zero F and below).
In some cases, from photos seen, the medical folks are in a tent. Others seem to be talking about using buildings that have a drive-through route that's normally used for things event set-up or vehicle service. Examples are livestock exhibition fairgrounds-type structures, big conference facilities, former auto-service buildings.
Not vax, but I was impressed with the organization and sanitation measures at a drive-through Covid test I took in the Fall, required before I could do an important outpatient surgical procedure.5 -
https://recoverytrial.net/news
Study into mortality results from giving plasma from recovered patients to hospitalized covid patients finds there is no benefit. In other words, the same percentage of people died if they received the plasma or not.7 -
https://recoverytrial.net/news
Study into mortality results from giving plasma from recovered patients to hospitalized covid patients finds there is no benefit. In other words, the same percentage of people died if they received the plasma or not.
Huh. It's looking like if you're hospitalized, steroids to deal with inflammation is still the best option. My understanding is even the monoclonal antibodies Trump got work best if given early in the infection, though I think they're still worth a shot once you're hospitalized if you can get them.5 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »@kshama2001 and @cwolfman13 I respect both your replies pointing out how the surgeon general is part of an administration and is therefore not apolitical. But, the other part of the original comment, which I also addressed, was how the 15 days to slow the spread did not "come from Fauci". As I quoted above, at the same approximate point in time, Fauci was stating "several weeks". In the overcall experience we have had, the 15 days of the surgeon general vs the several weeks stated by Fauci were equally wrong.
One of the big issues here is that we weren't even able to see what two weeks or several weeks of an actual lockdown would do. Everything was left to individual states. There were states who never shut anything down at all...others put in minimal restrictions...others shut down, but very quickly opened everything back up to almost normal. That's like having a special area of the swimming pool that it's ok to pee in. The only way anything like two weeks or several weeks would have worked is if everyone was on the same page and doing the same thing. This is pretty evident just by observing other countries that have effectively controlled the virus.
Also, if you remember back to March and the two week plan or the CDC and Fauci saying it would be longer...part of all of that was slow, phased opening up...which should have also been an indication to people that restrictions would go on considerably longer. Honestly, if anyone legitimately thought it would be a couple of weeks or several weeks and then we'd just be back to pre COVID life, I would have to question if they were actually paying attention to what was happening in the world around them.
There wasn't even a phased opening in many states...and even more states that were opening in phases, but not really following any kind of guideline as to what should or would be open in any given phase of re-opening.
There is a reason that the USA leads the world in COVID positivity rates...there is a reason other countries have been able to control the virus...
While all valid, my original post was simply in response to someone (don't recall who) stating that they never heard any two weeks statement, so I showed the surgeon general and the 15 days to slow the spread announced last March to show that there was something (not whether it was good or bad).
Then people said, well that statement was not from a scientist like Fauci. So I showed Fauci said fairly similar around the same time. My posts all have roots in the single original comment about never hearing of a "two week" plan.
It was 2 weeks to "slow the spread" not END the spread. We were supposed to be flattening the curve so resources would not be overwhelmed by a sudden, massive spike of infections. It was supposed to give us time to prepare for the coming onslaught. Although the time seemed to be squandered... Did anyone really say or even think it would be over in 2 weeks?
The only person telling us it would magically completely disappear soon was the president. I can see how people who believed his statements would be disappointed when the pandemic kept going...
I'm not sure you can say that Fauci's comment was "equally wrong" since he said it would be several weeks with restrictions in place to get things under control. Since we never actually had anything consistent and coordinated in place, we can't actually know if he would have been right or wrong. We never did the things he told us we needed to do.
And if you back and read the Fauci quotes in this thread, making sure to read all the text around what was bolded, he was actually saying "at least several weeks" and "several weeks or longer."
True, but if I were have a repair done and the contractor stated servers weeks or longer back mid-March, I would expect it to be complete by some point in May.
But it wouldn't be the first time the contractor had seen that project before and they would've been able to see your budget, plans, and home before estimating a time frame. They'd be able to talk to you directly without having their plan and priorities filtered through the government, press, and social media. And they wouldn't have to worry about you getting in their way the whole time, stealing their tools, and sometimes refusing to let them into your house while having parties that broke apart work they'd already completed.
I've been disappointed by a lot in "several weeks" contractor estimates too, although granted never has it meant "a year or more." Back when I was in a condo, we had our roof redone, and then I had my roof deck redone, and it was supposed to be "several weeks" as of April, and due to weather (rainy spring/summer) plus a lot of people who were ahead of us who also had their jobs pushed back or that took longer than expected, I think ours got done in August.
I guess several is vague enough that it was still several weeks (I actually think originally it was "a few weeks").
That said, I did think from the beginning it was a very uncertain period of time, and people were talking about a second wave from early on too.5 -
With respect to estimates, contractors' or public health authorities':
I had a job that included lots of project management, for somewhat novel products. Completion estimates were very difficult, but everyone wants one, even right up front, when there's very little info about the nature of the work to be done, even.
It's absolutely 100% human nature, near universal, to give an estimate that won't p*ss off those asking. You can't *not* give an estimate, you don't have the info needed to give a real estimate, so you do what keeps people off your back.
Later in career, many of us find out that this is just delaying the slapback, and the results can be worse later, when people think you lied to get the job or something. So, if you can, and not be shot on the spot, up front you make an extremely, extremely long estimate, one you hope to be able to beat. (Humans being optimistic and overconfident, even these estimates sometimes turn out to be too short, but less likely to be of a whole different magnitude, so even if the audience is mad, they may not think you're a scurrilous, intentional liar.) If you do beat the ridiculously long estimate, then people are happy. (Mostly, they forget, and aren't happy regardless. 🤷♀️)
So: IME, estimates made by humans tend to be optimistic, shorter than realistic. If you make the estimate, people will probably be angry at you sooner or later. Angry sooner tends to be less total anger, but it's hard not to do what feels good in the moment, and puts the anger off until the future, when it's worse.
ETA: There's also a tendency for those receiving an estimate to remember any part of what you said that was closer to what they wanted to hear up front. They will then use that partial (sometimes even false) memory to whack you over the head later. Do I sound cynical? Yup.
It's not just your experience - studies show people are terrible at estimating how long tasks will take.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_fallacy
At my last job, over 12 years, there were only three of us pessimistic enough to give accurate time estimates. The owner of the company didn't want to hear these, which pretty much gave the naturally overly optimistic people permission to be wrong with their estimates.5 -
https://recoverytrial.net/news
Study into mortality results from giving plasma from recovered patients to hospitalized covid patients finds there is no benefit. In other words, the same percentage of people died if they received the plasma or not.
Huh. It's looking like if you're hospitalized, steroids to deal with inflammation is still the best option. My understanding is even the monoclonal antibodies Trump got work best if given early in the infection, though I think they're still worth a shot once you're hospitalized if you can get them.
That reminds me of this story I heard recently about a Washington state woman's inability to track down monoclonal antibody drugs after her COVID diagnosis:
https://www.wbur.org/npr/955716308/tracking-down-antibody-treatment-is-a-challenge-for-covid-19-patients
Monoclonal antibody drugs are supposed to help people with mild to moderate COVID-19 avoid the hospital, but it can be a challenge to find out where the treatment is offered. NPR has heard from people across the country who have been frustrated by this.
...Wagoner started calling around, including to her own doctor's office, which falsely informed her she would need to be hospitalized to be eligible for the drug. In fact, hospitalized patients aren't eligible for this treatment because clinical tests indicated they were only effective early in the disease.
"Then I called the Washington state public health [department], and they'd never heard of either therapeutic," Wagoner said.
State health officials eventually told Lee to call the big hospital in Spokane, but he simply got the runaround there and never learned whether it provides the treatment.
...Fortunately, she was starting to feel better on her own, so she simply gave up the search. She remembered President Trump promising that everyone could get this drug after he himself took it.
"That was my frustration," she said. "Trump said we could have them, but you can't get the dang things!"5 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »@kshama2001 and @cwolfman13 I respect both your replies pointing out how the surgeon general is part of an administration and is therefore not apolitical. But, the other part of the original comment, which I also addressed, was how the 15 days to slow the spread did not "come from Fauci". As I quoted above, at the same approximate point in time, Fauci was stating "several weeks". In the overcall experience we have had, the 15 days of the surgeon general vs the several weeks stated by Fauci were equally wrong.
One of the big issues here is that we weren't even able to see what two weeks or several weeks of an actual lockdown would do. Everything was left to individual states. There were states who never shut anything down at all...others put in minimal restrictions...others shut down, but very quickly opened everything back up to almost normal. That's like having a special area of the swimming pool that it's ok to pee in. The only way anything like two weeks or several weeks would have worked is if everyone was on the same page and doing the same thing. This is pretty evident just by observing other countries that have effectively controlled the virus.
Also, if you remember back to March and the two week plan or the CDC and Fauci saying it would be longer...part of all of that was slow, phased opening up...which should have also been an indication to people that restrictions would go on considerably longer. Honestly, if anyone legitimately thought it would be a couple of weeks or several weeks and then we'd just be back to pre COVID life, I would have to question if they were actually paying attention to what was happening in the world around them.
There wasn't even a phased opening in many states...and even more states that were opening in phases, but not really following any kind of guideline as to what should or would be open in any given phase of re-opening.
There is a reason that the USA leads the world in COVID positivity rates...there is a reason other countries have been able to control the virus...
While all valid, my original post was simply in response to someone (don't recall who) stating that they never heard any two weeks statement, so I showed the surgeon general and the 15 days to slow the spread announced last March to show that there was something (not whether it was good or bad).
Then people said, well that statement was not from a scientist like Fauci. So I showed Fauci said fairly similar around the same time. My posts all have roots in the single original comment about never hearing of a "two week" plan.
It was 2 weeks to "slow the spread" not END the spread. We were supposed to be flattening the curve so resources would not be overwhelmed by a sudden, massive spike of infections. It was supposed to give us time to prepare for the coming onslaught. Although the time seemed to be squandered... Did anyone really say or even think it would be over in 2 weeks?
The only person telling us it would magically completely disappear soon was the president. I can see how people who believed his statements would be disappointed when the pandemic kept going...
I'm not sure you can say that Fauci's comment was "equally wrong" since he said it would be several weeks with restrictions in place to get things under control. Since we never actually had anything consistent and coordinated in place, we can't actually know if he would have been right or wrong. We never did the things he told us we needed to do.
And if you back and read the Fauci quotes in this thread, making sure to read all the text around what was bolded, he was actually saying "at least several weeks" and "several weeks or longer."
True, but if I were have a repair done and the contractor stated servers weeks or longer back mid-March, I would expect it to be complete by some point in May.
Contractors have done the work before, making it much easier to give estimates. This is a NOVEL coronavirus.
Also this:But it wouldn't be the first time the contractor had seen that project before and they would've been able to see your budget, plans, and home before estimating a time frame. They'd be able to talk to you directly without having their plan and priorities filtered through the government, press, and social media. And they wouldn't have to worry about you getting in their way the whole time, stealing their tools, and sometimes refusing to let them into your house while having parties that broke apart work they'd already completed.5 -
paperpudding wrote: »corinasue1143 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »I was expecting to wait awhile before I was even eligible for the vaccine, feeling kind of okay with that because I would rather see how side effects play out. But I received a note in the mail today, because I help care for my BIL I'm eligible for the vaccine now and need to call our local hospital by the 20th to set up an appt.
The 1st shot doesn't scare me but the 2nd one does, only because I've heard people get worse reactions with that one.
I'm 67, pretty healthy as far as it all goes, had Covid(Blessedly mild) back around Thanksgiving but just not knowing how it'll affect me leaves me apprehensive.
Any encouraging words to offer?
Thank you!!
Reenie, have you gotten the shingles vaccine? I have to say, after listening to conversations about vaccines for the last month or two, I am looking forward to the covid vaccines and kind of scared of the shingles one!
In my work, I have given hundreds of shingles vaccines - no more reactions than any other vaccine.
As with all vaccines some people get sore arm and /or redness and swelling.
But doesn't seem any more so than any other vaccine.
It is a live vaccine though so some people cannot have it.
Who should not have the shingles vaccine? Curious
It is a live vaccine -so same as any live vaccines (eg MMR) people with suppressed immunity should not have it- ie those on immunosuppressant meds such as chemotherapy,organ transplant reciprients, people on dialysis, people with HIV, those on some heavy duty meds for other conditions eg methotrexate.
also pregnant women - but since Zostavax only approved for people over 50, this isnt usually an issue.
Actually, Zostavax just got discontinued in the US (don't know about elsewhere) - Shingrix is the one being given.
https://www.singlecare.com/blog/shingrix-vs-zostavax/
https://www.cdc.gov/shingles/vaccination.html
I am posting from Australia -Zostavax is the vaccine given here, we have never had Shingrix in Australia.
Zostavax is a live vaccine and a single dose.
However if Shingrix is also a live vaccine (and it almost certainly is) then same restrictions on immuno compromised people and pregnant women would apply.
Certainly (re previous post) a person on Humira and methotrexate would be contraindicated and not recieve the vaccine.
3 -
papperpudding, could you tell me if someone with anaphylaxis to Bactrim would be fine to take the vaccine? I'm assuming it's OK. It just worries me a bit and not asked the doctor yet.0
-
papperpudding, could you tell me if someone with anaphylaxis to Bactrim would be fine to take the vaccine? I'm assuming it's OK. It just worries me a bit and not asked the doctor yet.
Which vaccine?
sorry, not meant to be silly question, but topic has wandered on to shingles vaccine too.
Zostavax - I can see no reason why not - although, as with all vaccines you have not had before, you should wait 15 minutes afterwards in case of allergic reaction.
Following this rule would be even more important for anyone with anaphylactic history to anything
Covid vaccine - maybe not.
I know people with anaphylactic history to anything are now contraindicated in UK.
But whether we are going to use same vaccine in Australia or be as cautious about it - I dont know
(as of course you know, but for benifit of other readers - Australian vaccination program will start in late Febuary)
2 -
In my state, vaccinations continue to go mostly smoothly, except we just can’t get enough vaccine. Feds have just now told us they won’t supply vaccine for second shot.2
-
kshama2001 wrote: »With respect to estimates, contractors' or public health authorities':
I had a job that included lots of project management, for somewhat novel products. Completion estimates were very difficult, but everyone wants one, even right up front, when there's very little info about the nature of the work to be done, even.
It's absolutely 100% human nature, near universal, to give an estimate that won't p*ss off those asking. You can't *not* give an estimate, you don't have the info needed to give a real estimate, so you do what keeps people off your back.
Later in career, many of us find out that this is just delaying the slapback, and the results can be worse later, when people think you lied to get the job or something. So, if you can, and not be shot on the spot, up front you make an extremely, extremely long estimate, one you hope to be able to beat. (Humans being optimistic and overconfident, even these estimates sometimes turn out to be too short, but less likely to be of a whole different magnitude, so even if the audience is mad, they may not think you're a scurrilous, intentional liar.) If you do beat the ridiculously long estimate, then people are happy. (Mostly, they forget, and aren't happy regardless. 🤷♀️)
So: IME, estimates made by humans tend to be optimistic, shorter than realistic. If you make the estimate, people will probably be angry at you sooner or later. Angry sooner tends to be less total anger, but it's hard not to do what feels good in the moment, and puts the anger off until the future, when it's worse.
ETA: There's also a tendency for those receiving an estimate to remember any part of what you said that was closer to what they wanted to hear up front. They will then use that partial (sometimes even false) memory to whack you over the head later. Do I sound cynical? Yup.
It's not just your experience - studies show people are terrible at estimating how long tasks will take.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_fallacy
At my last job, over 12 years, there were only three of us pessimistic enough to give accurate time estimates. The owner of the company didn't want to hear these, which pretty much gave the naturally overly optimistic people permission to be wrong with their estimates.
Absolutely. And some things are more difficult to estimate, especially things that depend on human behavior - like novel-virus pandemics, say.
Part of my point - maybe the more meaningful part, in context - is that the audience demands an estimate (even when there's ludicrously inadequate info to base one on), reacts angrily to more accurate (long) estimates because they want *quick*, and tends to remember any estimate with a twist favorable to their preconceptions. As the estimator, one can't win, so many will give a "happiness report" estimate just to defer the pain. (It's usually not IMO the best plan, but . . . .).
Some of these tendencies are in play with the pandemic-related estimates.3 -
paperpudding wrote: »papperpudding, could you tell me if someone with anaphylaxis to Bactrim would be fine to take the vaccine? I'm assuming it's OK. It just worries me a bit and not asked the doctor yet.
Which vaccine?
sorry, not meant to be silly question, but topic has wandered on to shingles vaccine too.
Zostavax - I can see no reason why not - although, as with all vaccines you have not had before, you should wait 15 minutes afterwards in case of allergic reaction.
Following this rule would be even more important for anyone with anaphylactic history to anything
Covid vaccine - maybe not.
I know people with anaphylactic history to anything are now contraindicated in UK.
But whether we are going to use same vaccine in Australia or be as cautious about it - I dont know
(as of course you know, but for benifit of other readers - Australian vaccination program will start in late Febuary)
Sorry, I meant any of the COVID vaccines. If you have an anaphylactic episode from anything you are allergic to and you are perhaps in a hospital like I was then are you not safe 100% if they give you adrenaline or can you still die? They gave it to me and I was fine last time. Oh this is a worry.. 7
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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