Coronavirus prep
Options
Replies
-
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 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Catching up on the discussion.
Anyhow, I too had forgotten about the original 2 week action plan until @kushie1 had mentioned it. But I am surprised that @JaneJellyRoll didn’t have a flashback and remember the “15 Days to Slow the Spread” initiative. If anyone else wants a reminder of where we were at last March, here is the surgeon general:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK2ypT2xweA
I occasionally appreciate going back and listening to what various people had to say in those early days and each iteration since.
@DNARules I totally agree with your comment about people stating or believing they are compliant when they are not. I can make a list of a few people right off the bat. I wonder if I technically should be on the list, though in my estimation I am making sincere efforts to follow guidelines.
@ahoy_m8 Good question about second doses. The plus is, if I heard correctly, the second doses are not exact on timing. They cannot be done early, but can be delayed.
@annpt77 Always said better than I can!
The plan wasn't followed though. Even at the time, it was obvious that many people were unwilling to comply, so I'm not sure why anyone would have thought it was just going to be two weeks.
And what's the proposal here? Even if some people did genuinely think that some people giving an effort for two weeks would be enough, do we just throw up our hands and refuse to do anything else when it became obviously that community spread was happening across the country?
What exactly are you asking for here?
It sure sounded like it was going to be 2 weeks. The governor of my state repeatedly said 2 weeks to slow the spread - right up to the 2 week deadline and then he extended it, over and over and over again. Maybe you are right and that it would never have worked (though most people I know stayed home during that time, only going to the store and home and/or having things delivered. After the constant extensions in the spring, and the wishy-washing that many in state and local government had in regards to what was acceptable and what was not (for instance not condemning protesting, but not allowing a gym to open with a very limited capacity, either gathering is fine or it's not). So now of course it's going to be harder to convince people to continue complying. If they did what was asked and it was never enough and they kept moving the bar many people are rightfully frustrated.
It's a virus, it will spread, it will mutate. I don't know what the answer is, but many people are reaching the end of their ropes with all these restrictions. I've been accused of not having a suggestion since I don't think these restrictions are sustainable and that's true. I just don't know. But all the people saying we have to keep doing this...what are your suggestions on the fact that kids are falling behind in school (especially those who lack parental supervision or ability to help and primarily low income kids), mental health issues including suicide attemtps are on the rise and the job losses that have been suffered are hurting people immensely. What do you think we can do to support these issues if you insist we must continue the restrictions?
I have no doubt that many of us personally experience the people around us doing the right things (at least the parts of their behavior we can observe), but in reality we know from many people are minimally compliant or not at all compliant. People are going to gyms and indoor dining when they can, they gather for holidays, they're having parties, some students had no option to do anything but in-person classes, and large gatherings were still happening in places where they were allowed.
I can't think of any problem impacting people that is made BETTER by hundreds of thousands of new cases and a couple thousand deaths every day. These people dying isn't going to help anyone with mental health issues. It appears we may be about to begin a situation with the government taking this actually seriously and also considering what steps we need to take to help people navigate the challenges of this situation, which will be a welcome change.
If gyms and indoor dining, as examples, are allowed in your area by state and/or local government and you go, following the rules in place for these businesses, aren't people being compliant?
You're complying with the law, but not really acting wisely (for example, we know that indoor dining is a major risk factor for transmission). This is why it doesn't really make sense to cite all these people who claim to have been perfectly compliant and still getting sick. Even if it's legal to indoor dine in parts of the US, it's not safe.
If you're doing the bare minimum legally, some people are counting that as compliance and then wondering why compliance isn't working.
One of the fitness people I follow on Insta leads classes at a gym in Atlanta. Currently. (She had a baby a few months ago.) In the videos, everyone looks like they’re six-ish feet apart, but there are at least 50 people in the classes and no one is wearing a mask. And they’re doing pretty intense aerobics. It’s like the virus doesn’t exist.
Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.18 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Catching up on the discussion.
Anyhow, I too had forgotten about the original 2 week action plan until @kushie1 had mentioned it. But I am surprised that @JaneJellyRoll didn’t have a flashback and remember the “15 Days to Slow the Spread” initiative. If anyone else wants a reminder of where we were at last March, here is the surgeon general:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK2ypT2xweA
I occasionally appreciate going back and listening to what various people had to say in those early days and each iteration since.
@DNARules I totally agree with your comment about people stating or believing they are compliant when they are not. I can make a list of a few people right off the bat. I wonder if I technically should be on the list, though in my estimation I am making sincere efforts to follow guidelines.
@ahoy_m8 Good question about second doses. The plus is, if I heard correctly, the second doses are not exact on timing. They cannot be done early, but can be delayed.
@annpt77 Always said better than I can!
The plan wasn't followed though. Even at the time, it was obvious that many people were unwilling to comply, so I'm not sure why anyone would have thought it was just going to be two weeks.
And what's the proposal here? Even if some people did genuinely think that some people giving an effort for two weeks would be enough, do we just throw up our hands and refuse to do anything else when it became obviously that community spread was happening across the country?
What exactly are you asking for here?
It sure sounded like it was going to be 2 weeks. The governor of my state repeatedly said 2 weeks to slow the spread - right up to the 2 week deadline and then he extended it, over and over and over again. Maybe you are right and that it would never have worked (though most people I know stayed home during that time, only going to the store and home and/or having things delivered. After the constant extensions in the spring, and the wishy-washing that many in state and local government had in regards to what was acceptable and what was not (for instance not condemning protesting, but not allowing a gym to open with a very limited capacity, either gathering is fine or it's not). So now of course it's going to be harder to convince people to continue complying. If they did what was asked and it was never enough and they kept moving the bar many people are rightfully frustrated.
It's a virus, it will spread, it will mutate. I don't know what the answer is, but many people are reaching the end of their ropes with all these restrictions. I've been accused of not having a suggestion since I don't think these restrictions are sustainable and that's true. I just don't know. But all the people saying we have to keep doing this...what are your suggestions on the fact that kids are falling behind in school (especially those who lack parental supervision or ability to help and primarily low income kids), mental health issues including suicide attemtps are on the rise and the job losses that have been suffered are hurting people immensely. What do you think we can do to support these issues if you insist we must continue the restrictions?
I have no doubt that many of us personally experience the people around us doing the right things (at least the parts of their behavior we can observe), but in reality we know from many people are minimally compliant or not at all compliant. People are going to gyms and indoor dining when they can, they gather for holidays, they're having parties, some students had no option to do anything but in-person classes, and large gatherings were still happening in places where they were allowed.
I can't think of any problem impacting people that is made BETTER by hundreds of thousands of new cases and a couple thousand deaths every day. These people dying isn't going to help anyone with mental health issues. It appears we may be about to begin a situation with the government taking this actually seriously and also considering what steps we need to take to help people navigate the challenges of this situation, which will be a welcome change.
If gyms and indoor dining, as examples, are allowed in your area by state and/or local government and you go, following the rules in place for these businesses, aren't people being compliant?
You're complying with the law, but not really acting wisely (for example, we know that indoor dining is a major risk factor for transmission). This is why it doesn't really make sense to cite all these people who claim to have been perfectly compliant and still getting sick. Even if it's legal to indoor dine in parts of the US, it's not safe.
If you're doing the bare minimum legally, some people are counting that as compliance and then wondering why compliance isn't working.
Personally, I don't even understand the claim that everyone in the hospital says they were compliant. It doesn't jibe with the stories from nurses who talk about patients who stay in denial/rebellion until the bitter end, the families who speak with regret of their Covid-deceased family member who was a denialist and did the wrong things, the reports of "Covid parties" and consequent deaths, . . . and many more such examples that could be cited.
Do most people who are hospitalized believe they were doing the right things? Of course. Most people always believe they're doing the right things, in most ways. That doesn't tell us much, really.
People here in SoCal, at least some of them, have been honest. Several doctors were interviewed by the LA Times in mid-December and said at least half their patients in the hospitals admitted to participating in gatherings with other households for Thanksgiving.
In the end, honesty with the contact tracers can help save lives.11 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Catching up on the discussion.
Anyhow, I too had forgotten about the original 2 week action plan until @kushie1 had mentioned it. But I am surprised that @JaneJellyRoll didn’t have a flashback and remember the “15 Days to Slow the Spread” initiative. If anyone else wants a reminder of where we were at last March, here is the surgeon general:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK2ypT2xweA
I occasionally appreciate going back and listening to what various people had to say in those early days and each iteration since.
@DNARules I totally agree with your comment about people stating or believing they are compliant when they are not. I can make a list of a few people right off the bat. I wonder if I technically should be on the list, though in my estimation I am making sincere efforts to follow guidelines.
@ahoy_m8 Good question about second doses. The plus is, if I heard correctly, the second doses are not exact on timing. They cannot be done early, but can be delayed.
@annpt77 Always said better than I can!
The plan wasn't followed though. Even at the time, it was obvious that many people were unwilling to comply, so I'm not sure why anyone would have thought it was just going to be two weeks.
And what's the proposal here? Even if some people did genuinely think that some people giving an effort for two weeks would be enough, do we just throw up our hands and refuse to do anything else when it became obviously that community spread was happening across the country?
What exactly are you asking for here?
It sure sounded like it was going to be 2 weeks. The governor of my state repeatedly said 2 weeks to slow the spread - right up to the 2 week deadline and then he extended it, over and over and over again. Maybe you are right and that it would never have worked (though most people I know stayed home during that time, only going to the store and home and/or having things delivered. After the constant extensions in the spring, and the wishy-washing that many in state and local government had in regards to what was acceptable and what was not (for instance not condemning protesting, but not allowing a gym to open with a very limited capacity, either gathering is fine or it's not). So now of course it's going to be harder to convince people to continue complying. If they did what was asked and it was never enough and they kept moving the bar many people are rightfully frustrated.
It's a virus, it will spread, it will mutate. I don't know what the answer is, but many people are reaching the end of their ropes with all these restrictions. I've been accused of not having a suggestion since I don't think these restrictions are sustainable and that's true. I just don't know. But all the people saying we have to keep doing this...what are your suggestions on the fact that kids are falling behind in school (especially those who lack parental supervision or ability to help and primarily low income kids), mental health issues including suicide attemtps are on the rise and the job losses that have been suffered are hurting people immensely. What do you think we can do to support these issues if you insist we must continue the restrictions?
I have no doubt that many of us personally experience the people around us doing the right things (at least the parts of their behavior we can observe), but in reality we know from many people are minimally compliant or not at all compliant. People are going to gyms and indoor dining when they can, they gather for holidays, they're having parties, some students had no option to do anything but in-person classes, and large gatherings were still happening in places where they were allowed.
I can't think of any problem impacting people that is made BETTER by hundreds of thousands of new cases and a couple thousand deaths every day. These people dying isn't going to help anyone with mental health issues. It appears we may be about to begin a situation with the government taking this actually seriously and also considering what steps we need to take to help people navigate the challenges of this situation, which will be a welcome change.
If gyms and indoor dining, as examples, are allowed in your area by state and/or local government and you go, following the rules in place for these businesses, aren't people being compliant?
You're complying with the law, but not really acting wisely (for example, we know that indoor dining is a major risk factor for transmission). This is why it doesn't really make sense to cite all these people who claim to have been perfectly compliant and still getting sick. Even if it's legal to indoor dine in parts of the US, it's not safe.
If you're doing the bare minimum legally, some people are counting that as compliance and then wondering why compliance isn't working.
Personally, I don't even understand the claim that everyone in the hospital says they were compliant. It doesn't jibe with the stories from nurses who talk about patients who stay in denial/rebellion until the bitter end, the families who speak with regret of their Covid-deceased family member who was a denialist and did the wrong things, the reports of "Covid parties" and consequent deaths, . . . and many more such examples that could be cited.
Do most people who are hospitalized believe they were doing the right things? Of course. Most people always believe they're doing the right things, in most ways. That doesn't tell us much, really.
Exactly...
My cousin and her husband are good examples. They aren't deniers, but they haven't been exactly in keeping with safe practices. I found out New Years Eve that both she and her husband had contracted COVID. I was talking to my sister and she said it was likely the Christmas Eve party they had. Last I had talked to my cousin, they weren't having their usual Christmas Eve party so I was a little surprised and confused. In fact they didn't have their normal Christmas Eve party...that usually consists of 100 people plus coming and going...they decided to only invite 30 people to be "safe". 1/3 of the attendees have also contracted COVID.
Reminds me a little of the wedding in rural Maine in August. 65 people. Over half got COVID. Spread it to over 178 people at last count. 7 deaths—none of whom attended the wedding. 😞 One of the people who attended the wedding worked in an assisted living center. Another worked in a prison. Passed it to the prisoners and to other guards who took it home to their families.10 -
BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »Genuine question here, this is not directed at anyone but is something I’ve thought about when the subject of ‘children falling behind with schooling’ comes up.
Who exactly are they ‘falling behind’? The virus impacts their whole peer group not just a select few. If they’re all effected by either school closures, home schooling, online learning, limited contact teaching or whatever measures are in place where they live, then they’re all equally disadvantaged.
An entire generation world wide is in the same situation, so it’s not as if when it comes to finding their place in the world when they leave education they’ll be up against their peers who had a different experience.
Unless by then we’ve been invaded by people from other planets where COVID didn’t exist! 😂
There is a very disparate educational experience for the children in this country, unfortunately.
The children from families and districts that have fewer resources will be left behind their peers whose families and districts have the money to compensate for lost time with extra classes, materials, tutoring. Heck, just having adequate WIFI for online learning is challenging for some families.
Last spring when my college shut down and asked people who could to go home, a student I’d been working with all year went home. I asked what his plan was for internet, as he didn’t have access at home. He said he’s use the public library. When the libraries closed, he said he’d use Starbucks. When that closed, he called and asked if he could come back to campus. We took him back. And he’s not the only one in circumstances like that. A lot of the students this year said they’re on campus because “finishing high school on my phone sucked!”11 -
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.
They’ve turned one of the big Disneyland parking lots (Toy Story, I think) into a massive vaccination site. Kinda makes me smile a bit. Happiest place on earth ... 😊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..
If you have an anaphylactic reaction somewhere that people have adrenaline on site and know how to use it - very very unlikely you would die.
Nevertheless we dont want preventable anaphylactic reactions.
I know UK is now not giving Covid vaccine to people with any previous anaphylactic reaction to anything - following a couple of anaphylactic reactions to Covid vaccine.
But those were people with multiple allergies who carried an epi pen wherever they went - they also made a full recovery after trained staff administered adrenaline.
How that will effect Australia's Covid vaccine decisions, I do not know.
2 -
paperpudding wrote: »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..
If you have an anaphylactic reaction somewhere that people have adrenaline on site and know how to use it - very very unlikely you would die.
Nevertheless we dont want preventable anaphylactic reactions.
I know UK is now not giving Covid vaccine to people with any previous anaphylactic reaction to anything - following a couple of anaphylactic reactions to Covid vaccine.
But those were people with multiple allergies who carried an epi pen wherever they went - they also made a full recovery after trained staff administered adrenaline.
How that will effect Australia's Covid vaccine decisions, I do not know.
I appreciate your views on the matter. I always have an Epipen although sometimes it's out of date when I forget to get a new one. Ahem. I feel a bit better after your thoughts on it. Much appreciated.3 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Catching up on the discussion.
Anyhow, I too had forgotten about the original 2 week action plan until @kushie1 had mentioned it. But I am surprised that @JaneJellyRoll didn’t have a flashback and remember the “15 Days to Slow the Spread” initiative. If anyone else wants a reminder of where we were at last March, here is the surgeon general:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK2ypT2xweA
I occasionally appreciate going back and listening to what various people had to say in those early days and each iteration since.
@DNARules I totally agree with your comment about people stating or believing they are compliant when they are not. I can make a list of a few people right off the bat. I wonder if I technically should be on the list, though in my estimation I am making sincere efforts to follow guidelines.
@ahoy_m8 Good question about second doses. The plus is, if I heard correctly, the second doses are not exact on timing. They cannot be done early, but can be delayed.
@annpt77 Always said better than I can!
The plan wasn't followed though. Even at the time, it was obvious that many people were unwilling to comply, so I'm not sure why anyone would have thought it was just going to be two weeks.
And what's the proposal here? Even if some people did genuinely think that some people giving an effort for two weeks would be enough, do we just throw up our hands and refuse to do anything else when it became obviously that community spread was happening across the country?
What exactly are you asking for here?
It sure sounded like it was going to be 2 weeks. The governor of my state repeatedly said 2 weeks to slow the spread - right up to the 2 week deadline and then he extended it, over and over and over again. Maybe you are right and that it would never have worked (though most people I know stayed home during that time, only going to the store and home and/or having things delivered. After the constant extensions in the spring, and the wishy-washing that many in state and local government had in regards to what was acceptable and what was not (for instance not condemning protesting, but not allowing a gym to open with a very limited capacity, either gathering is fine or it's not). So now of course it's going to be harder to convince people to continue complying. If they did what was asked and it was never enough and they kept moving the bar many people are rightfully frustrated.
It's a virus, it will spread, it will mutate. I don't know what the answer is, but many people are reaching the end of their ropes with all these restrictions. I've been accused of not having a suggestion since I don't think these restrictions are sustainable and that's true. I just don't know. But all the people saying we have to keep doing this...what are your suggestions on the fact that kids are falling behind in school (especially those who lack parental supervision or ability to help and primarily low income kids), mental health issues including suicide attemtps are on the rise and the job losses that have been suffered are hurting people immensely. What do you think we can do to support these issues if you insist we must continue the restrictions?
I have no doubt that many of us personally experience the people around us doing the right things (at least the parts of their behavior we can observe), but in reality we know from many people are minimally compliant or not at all compliant. People are going to gyms and indoor dining when they can, they gather for holidays, they're having parties, some students had no option to do anything but in-person classes, and large gatherings were still happening in places where they were allowed.
I can't think of any problem impacting people that is made BETTER by hundreds of thousands of new cases and a couple thousand deaths every day. These people dying isn't going to help anyone with mental health issues. It appears we may be about to begin a situation with the government taking this actually seriously and also considering what steps we need to take to help people navigate the challenges of this situation, which will be a welcome change.
If gyms and indoor dining, as examples, are allowed in your area by state and/or local government and you go, following the rules in place for these businesses, aren't people being compliant?
You're complying with the law, but not really acting wisely (for example, we know that indoor dining is a major risk factor for transmission). This is why it doesn't really make sense to cite all these people who claim to have been perfectly compliant and still getting sick. Even if it's legal to indoor dine in parts of the US, it's not safe.
If you're doing the bare minimum legally, some people are counting that as compliance and then wondering why compliance isn't working.
Personally, I don't even understand the claim that everyone in the hospital says they were compliant. It doesn't jibe with the stories from nurses who talk about patients who stay in denial/rebellion until the bitter end, the families who speak with regret of their Covid-deceased family member who was a denialist and did the wrong things, the reports of "Covid parties" and consequent deaths, . . . and many more such examples that could be cited.
Do most people who are hospitalized believe they were doing the right things? Of course. Most people always believe they're doing the right things, in most ways. That doesn't tell us much, really.
Exactly...
My cousin and her husband are good examples. They aren't deniers, but they haven't been exactly in keeping with safe practices. I found out New Years Eve that both she and her husband had contracted COVID. I was talking to my sister and she said it was likely the Christmas Eve party they had. Last I had talked to my cousin, they weren't having their usual Christmas Eve party so I was a little surprised and confused. In fact they didn't have their normal Christmas Eve party...that usually consists of 100 people plus coming and going...they decided to only invite 30 people to be "safe". 1/3 of the attendees have also contracted COVID.
Reminds me a little of the wedding in rural Maine in August. 65 people. Over half got COVID. Spread it to over 178 people at last count. 7 deaths—none of whom attended the wedding. 😞 One of the people who attended the wedding worked in an assisted living center. Another worked in a prison. Passed it to the prisoners and to other guards who took it home to their families.
Weddings and funerals are the worst places to be for COVID. My uncle died in mid-December and my aunt(his wife) almost died. They chose to have a funeral just days after she got out of the hospital on Dec. 27th and my parents, a nephew and another aunt developed symptoms within 4-5 days after the funeral. I'm sure others got it too. Everyone wore masks but people were hugging. I didn't get it thankfully. I really struggled with whether to go or not go. They were my Godparents and we were really close, so against my better judgement, I went.
Had to quarantine however, because my mom called me and my sister on New Year's eve saying she felt like she was dying. So of course we went over there. I thought she might have covid but she didn't want to go to the hospital on the holiday to get tested so waited til Monday the 4th. Was put in the hospital and just got out 2 days ago. Weird thing is, everyone had very mild symptoms which I think is because we all had masks on. My mom's issue was she was suddenly severely anemic. Covid wasn't really a big deal. She was on meds for it but the bigger issue was she needed 2 blood transfusions. They ran dozens of tests and found no internal bleeding. I think it has something to do with Covid. Too much of a coincidence that it happened when she got it. She also has every comorbidity that should have killed her; COPD, high blood pressure, diabetes, A-Fib, and obesity. She barely coughed and never had a fever.12 -
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.
I'd be much more comfortable with a drive-through scenario, and there has been talk about that locally, and it makes sense from the standpoint of reaching the volume of jabs they want to reach. But I kept thinking of all the news footage we saw they first rolled the vaccine out for health care workers, and there were a dozen or so people sitting in socially distanced chairs, with nearly as many people tending to them, and they were being asked to stay for observation for 5 or 10 minutes, and longer if they had a history of allergic reactions to vaccines.
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.
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.
Well, that shoots down my theory that IRL you're Murphy Brown.
Edited to delete the second iteration of the image.
7 -
I admit to not reading everything here and all around the internet related to Covid, but I'm wondering if there are any stats out yet, regarding side effects from getting Covid vaccines? I hear stories here and there, positive and negative, but am wondering if there's anything with greater numbers involved. Maybe too early to tell?
Thanks all
0 -
I admit to not reading everything here and all around the internet related to Covid, but I'm wondering if there are any stats out yet, regarding side effects from getting Covid vaccines? I hear stories here and there, positive and negative, but am wondering if there's anything with greater numbers involved. Maybe too early to tell?
Thanks all
Anecdotal, but my Dad (76) got the Moderna vaccine on Wed. He said he got some chills that night, and the injection site was a little sore the next day. That was it. He's doing fine.
Not related to Reenie's post but I'm in northeastern TN, and Dad got vaxed Wed thanks to serendipity. The local health dept still has no vaccine (it's been 15 days since they ran out on the first day of 75+, which is weird b/c we have a lot of anti-vaxxers here). But a FB friend who works at the VA hospital posted about a Veteran's vaccine clinic. Dad went and was in and out in 15 min.
This is an example of one of the problems. The right hand doesn't know what the left is doing. Dad IS on the VA's Covid Vaccine email notification list. He never got one. The local papers and news don't know about it. If I hadn't logged into FB, and the VA nurse hadn't posted a link, Dad would still be waiting. He gets the second one Feb 28th. This is great news for my oldest who is starting her second semester of her freshman year and has a service learning class for her Honors scholarship which will occasionally be meeting in person (masked and distanced.) I would prefer to not expose the other kids and my husband, but she is a very conscientious young woman and will be very careful to maintain distance and mask properly. As it is, it will be the fall before the rest of us get ours most likely.
305 days of mostly locked down. I'm so tired mentally. Community spread is still bad here. Hubby said mask compliance was worse than it's been in awhile yesterday when he went grocerying. Locally, people have learned nothing apparently.
I know my husband's family hasn't. It's sad when insisting on living your lifestyle undeterred by a pandemic is more important than spending time with your grandkids.
13 -
L1zardQueen wrote: »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.
You're right about that--both my husband and my father have had shingle outbreaks: my husband has to get his eyes checked by a specialist every year now. I also remember both of them stating they felt like absolute *kitten* when they were going through it. I may check with my primary doctor next time I see her to see if she thinks it would be a good idea.2 -
baconslave wrote: »I admit to not reading everything here and all around the internet related to Covid, but I'm wondering if there are any stats out yet, regarding side effects from getting Covid vaccines? I hear stories here and there, positive and negative, but am wondering if there's anything with greater numbers involved. Maybe too early to tell?
Thanks all
Anecdotal, but my Dad (76) got the Moderna vaccine on Wed. He said he got some chills that night, and the injection site was a little sore the next day. That was it. He's doing fine.
Not related to Reenie's post but I'm in northeastern TN, and Dad got vaxed Wed thanks to serendipity. The local health dept still has no vaccine (it's been 15 days since they ran out on the first day of 75+, which is weird b/c we have a lot of anti-vaxxers here). But a FB friend who works at the VA hospital posted about a Veteran's vaccine clinic. Dad went and was in and out in 15 min.
This is an example of one of the problems. The right hand doesn't know what the left is doing. Dad IS on the VA's Covid Vaccine email notification list. He never got one. The local papers and news don't know about it. If I hadn't logged into FB, and the VA nurse hadn't posted a link, Dad would still be waiting. He gets the second one Feb 28th. This is great news for my oldest who is starting her second semester of her freshman year and has a service learning class for her Honors scholarship which will occasionally be meeting in person (masked and distanced.) I would prefer to not expose the other kids and my husband, but she is a very conscientious young woman and will be very careful to maintain distance and mask properly. As it is, it will be the fall before the rest of us get ours most likely.
305 days of mostly locked down. I'm so tired mentally. Community spread is still bad here. Hubby said mask compliance was worse than it's been in awhile yesterday when he went grocerying. Locally, people have learned nothing apparently. I know my husband's family hasn't. It's sad when insisting on living your lifestyle undeterred by a pandemic is more important than spending time with your grandkids.
VA is getting the word out by mail to some I know so that is a direct distribution vs state controlled distribution.0 -
I admit to not reading everything here and all around the internet related to Covid, but I'm wondering if there are any stats out yet, regarding side effects from getting Covid vaccines? I hear stories here and there, positive and negative, but am wondering if there's anything with greater numbers involved. Maybe too early to tell?
Thanks all
These are the stats that Pfizer put out based on their trial results:
Fatigue has been reported by roughly 63 percent of research subjects who received the vaccine, while headache and muscle pain have affected about 55 and 38 percent of participants, respectively. In most cases, those symptoms have been mild and resolved within a day or so.
My sister got the first dose with no issues. A lot of her colleagues who have gotten the 2nd dose are reporting a full day of headache, nausea, and fever. But it's gone in 24 hours. Those reactions are a good indication that your immune system is doing its job. You're not sick, it's just an immune reaction. It's sure as heck worth it to feel crappy for one day.13 -
I had the first Shingrix Nov.1 and just had the 2nd one on 1-7, so guess I will have to wait a little while to get the Covid vaccine, but not near getting it anyway. I had a red spot about 3" across from the first one and my whole upper arm got red with the 2nd. Sore arm both times, maybe a little headache with the 2nd, nothing else.
Iowa is still in Phase 1a (medical & long term care) with the Covid shots, but is hoping to start Phase 1b by Feb 1. When I checked last, Phase 1b includes people 75+, teachers, first responders, correction officers & inmates, people in Sober Houses, Detention facilities, etc. Iowa is not doing people 65-74 in Phase 1b (like I think the Fed Govt recommended). I think they might be in Phase 1c, and it bothers me that I have to wait (I'm 71) until after people incarcerated & detained. I understand they are in close quarters, but they are in that position thru their own actions. I know I shouldn't feel that way, but I am like most people, I am tired of being isolated from family & friends. Sorry for the rant, but frustrated.10 -
RetiredAndLovingIt wrote: »I had the first Shingrix Nov.1 and just had the 2nd one on 1-7, so guess I will have to wait a little while to get the Covid vaccine, but not near getting it anyway. I had a red spot about 3" across from the first one and my whole upper arm got red with the 2nd. Sore arm both times, maybe a little headache with the 2nd, nothing else.
Iowa is still in Phase 1a (medical & long term care) with the Covid shots, but is hoping to start Phase 1b by Feb 1. When I checked last, Phase 1b includes people 75+, teachers, first responders, correction officers & inmates, people in Sober Houses, Detention facilities, etc. Iowa is not doing people 65-74 in Phase 1b (like I think the Fed Govt recommended). I think they might be in Phase 1c, and it bothers me that I have to wait (I'm 71) until after people incarcerated & detained. I understand they are in close quarters, but they are in that position thru their own actions. I know I shouldn't feel that way, but I am like most people, I am tired of being isolated from family & friends. Sorry for the rant, but frustrated.
I can understand that frustration, 100%. I'd say this, though: The communities here that have good-sized prisons have really struggled. Once the disease gets started in the prison, it leaks into the community through prison staff, almost unavoidably. Those become hot spots that can spread further. The reasons to vaccinate in the prisons are not solely for the benefit of the prisoners, but also to limit spread to people in those already-stressful/dangerous jobs, and to their families and communities.14 -
@ReenieHJ
FYI. We are all different individuals so not everybody will have the same side effect. However, it is good to know so we don't worry because they are treatable, short lived, and expected. Even if they suck!
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2021/01/12/dr-frank-mcgeorge-shares-experience-with-second-dose-of-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine/2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 396.5K Introduce Yourself
- 44.2K Getting Started
- 260.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 449 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.3K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.5K Chit-Chat
- 2.6K Fun and Games
- 4.5K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions