Coronavirus prep

1355356358360361498

Replies

  • baconslave
    baconslave Posts: 7,018 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Just a PSA reminder that (just like with weight loss articles) just because a news or tabloid website posts an article and references a study, or even a statement by a scientific org, doesn't mean that the article is drawing the correct conclusion.

    I just saw people on the tweeter loosing their crap because "eggs are bad again" because of some dumb self-reported correlation study that was inadequately reported on news sites. They are doing that with covid too, so if you don't feel like parsing the scientific language of the actual study, just keep distancing, wearing your mask(s), and looking for the darn vaccine and dont get lost in the weeds. The apocalypse has been stressful enough. :heart:

    Exactly. I always sift through the article and find the actual study and look at it. I don't need a possibly dirty or twisted lens to look at it through TYVM. I can do it myself. I'm a big girl. :smirk:
    People on the tweeter (I will forever call it that now, so hilarious!) excel at losing their crap aren't they.
  • baconslave
    baconslave Posts: 7,018 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    baconslave wrote: »
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    I couldn't find any information on this question but I'm curious, maybe someone here knows. Concerning receiving the Moderna vaccine, are recipients under age 55 known to have a tougher time with side effects than other age categories?

    From what I have read it is more common of recipients under 55 to have a more robust response to vaccines. Vaccines have a substance called an "adjuvant" that is designed to alert the body that there is an invader to provoke a response. As older people have less energetic immune systems, their response is less pronounced. It just doesn't pounce as hard. The Covid vax acts the same. So I imagine that if that is the case for Modern, they used a more provocatory adjuvant. My Dad is 76, and he got severe aches and chills the night after the vaccine. And soreness at the injection site and that was all. He'll get his second tomorrow. So we shall see how he weathers that.

    So the 2nd dose tends to overall provoke more severe reactions than the first across both, but according to this source, Moderna's overall side effects are worse than Pfizer's. https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-why-your-second-dose-of-covid-19-vaccine-will-likely-have-stronger-side-effects#Millions-of-doses,-few-problems

    EDIT: Being the shameless nerd that I am, I couldn't let this go. According one study, neither use a separate adjuvant, but "BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna do not explicitly state the use of an adjuvant within their vaccines, but RNA already contains immunostimulatory properties and signals through pathogen recognition receptors.72 It remains to be seen whether the immunostimulation from RNA is strong enough to confer full protection against SARS-CoV-2. There is also a possibility that the LNP carriers they utilize confer adjuvant properties themselves." Super neat. So if this is true, than the lipsomes and mRNA formulations in the Moderna are more naturally rowdy than the ones Pfizer uses.
    (This source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7553041/)

    This exactly they talked about on TWIV. They supposed that older immune systems slowly react over time while younger immune systems just bang it right out. They also joked that older people might simply be more used to being tired and achy and don't notice it :smile:

    My Dad has said that.
    I need to add that podcast to my queue.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    https://bnonews.com/index.php/2021/02/russia-first-human-cases-of-h5n8-bird-flu/

    Maybe thanks to Covid-19 learning experience over the last year things like h5n8 can be nipped in the bud to reduce the risk of another pandemic.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    edited February 2021
    https://www.mediaite.com/news/johns-hopkins-doctor-predicts-covid-will-be-mostly-gone-by-april/

    Sounds like high rates of Covid-19 may be finally winding down the pandemic.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    baconslave wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    baconslave wrote: »
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    I couldn't find any information on this question but I'm curious, maybe someone here knows. Concerning receiving the Moderna vaccine, are recipients under age 55 known to have a tougher time with side effects than other age categories?

    From what I have read it is more common of recipients under 55 to have a more robust response to vaccines. Vaccines have a substance called an "adjuvant" that is designed to alert the body that there is an invader to provoke a response. As older people have less energetic immune systems, their response is less pronounced. It just doesn't pounce as hard. The Covid vax acts the same. So I imagine that if that is the case for Modern, they used a more provocatory adjuvant. My Dad is 76, and he got severe aches and chills the night after the vaccine. And soreness at the injection site and that was all. He'll get his second tomorrow. So we shall see how he weathers that.

    So the 2nd dose tends to overall provoke more severe reactions than the first across both, but according to this source, Moderna's overall side effects are worse than Pfizer's. https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-why-your-second-dose-of-covid-19-vaccine-will-likely-have-stronger-side-effects#Millions-of-doses,-few-problems

    EDIT: Being the shameless nerd that I am, I couldn't let this go. According one study, neither use a separate adjuvant, but "BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna do not explicitly state the use of an adjuvant within their vaccines, but RNA already contains immunostimulatory properties and signals through pathogen recognition receptors.72 It remains to be seen whether the immunostimulation from RNA is strong enough to confer full protection against SARS-CoV-2. There is also a possibility that the LNP carriers they utilize confer adjuvant properties themselves." Super neat. So if this is true, than the lipsomes and mRNA formulations in the Moderna are more naturally rowdy than the ones Pfizer uses.
    (This source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7553041/)

    This exactly they talked about on TWIV. They supposed that older immune systems slowly react over time while younger immune systems just bang it right out. They also joked that older people might simply be more used to being tired and achy and don't notice it :smile:

    My Dad has said that.
    I need to add that podcast to my queue.

    It can be dense, prob two thirds of it goes over my head lol but it's so reassuring. When they get really technical, I kind of zone out and drift back when it starts to sound like it's back on my level :blush:
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/scott-gottlieb-coronavirus-downward-trend-face-the-nation/

    Sounds like we're finally over the final peak. We were told early on there will be no herd immunity with Covid-19.
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    lokihen wrote: »
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    I think that because smoking damages the lungs and Covid attacks the lungs and heart, smokers are at higher risk of serious illness and fatality. It's frustrating that my 81 year old diabetic husband has to wait in line with the 25 year old smoker, but it is easier for us to hole up than it might be for someone younger who needs to work. We can wait.

    That’s terrible. Where are you that 81 year olds aren’t already vaccinated? In TN we are down to 70+ now.

    I was looking at the latest info and at present diabetes is 1c in TN, along with 55+. I’m 52. So if I were just three years older, I would be eligible from my age at the same time as my diabetes, which seems nuts to me.

    Also, what stops people from claiming to smoke? Or even starting to smoke, just to get the vaccine?

    Here in Massachusetts our vax rollout has been horrendous. Wednesday, Gov. Charlie Baker announced that people accompanying those over 75 to mass vaccination sites could also sign up for a shot, which prompted posts on Craigslist soliciting seniors, outrage by teachers (who are not in a priority group) and others waiting patiently for shots, and this bit on The Daily Show:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua-xnNdB68w&t=122s

    https://www.boston.com/news/coronavirus/2021/02/11/massachusetts-vaccine-eligibility-companions-craigslist

    I guess if the alternative is that an elderly person can't get there on their own so doesn't get a shot - it makes sense? At this point in our supposed "rollout" I really don't care who they give the odd extra shot to as long as someone is getting it.

    I agree. I feel like there's not enough public recognition of the fact that each person vaccinated is one less (or 0.7 less or whatever the effective rate of that dose) potential transmission vector and one less (0.7 less) opportunity for a mutation to create a virus variant that could be more lethal, more transmissible, or more resistant to the vaccines.

    Anybody getting vaccinated helps me, even though I haven't gotten vaccinated yet. Especially if I haven't gotten vaccinated yet.

    I don’t have any evidence to substantiate this, but I feel like the vaccine probably is cutting transmission by a lot. Locally our rates have dropped sharply since January, starting at a time when they would have been expected to still be climbing from the holiday surge. I believe the change is because healthcare professionals were vaccinated. Since local tracing found that the largest single traceable source of infections was healthcare (with 65% being no known origin) it makes sense that stopping doctors, nurses, and healthcare workers from spreading it would show results quickly.
    Four people in Oregon who are at least two weeks past their second vaccination are positive for COVID.

    COVID will be endemic. We’ll likely need annual/semi-annual boosters. It’ll be like the flu vaccine, I think. Fewer people will get sick, and those who do will be less likely to be hospitalized or die.

    At our campus town hall last week, one of the doctors from the medical center said once you’re vaccinated you can only spread COVID if you’re infected yourself, but another doctor on the local news said fully vaccinated people could still spread it regardless. 🤷🏻‍♀️ Only time will tell.

    Did they explain how it could be spread by someone who isn't infected?

    They didn’t. I think it’s too early to tell. My guess is the variants will continue to cause issues. Just like the different flu viruses. The vaccine covers the three strains which are thought to be the most prevalent that season. But there are still many others out there. That’s why swine flu was so bad. It emerged unexpectedly and wasn’t in the vaccine that year. And we’ve been fighting the flu for years and this virus for barely a year.

    The jury will be out for a while on how effective the current vaccines are against the new variants and additional ones.
  • ReenieHJ
    ReenieHJ Posts: 9,724 Member
    edited February 2021
    hipari wrote: »
    My head is in a loop re: vaccines. I’ve always been a vaccine believer and taken everything officials recommend. I recently found out I’m pregnant, and covid vaccines are not approved for pregnant women. This means I can’t get a covid vaccine in the next 8 months, and even after that I don’t know how postpartum and breastfeeding are handled.

    This is the first time ever I have had to rely on others getting vaccinated and forming herd immunity around me, and I don’t like this feeling. This is also the first time I’ve been worried about myself getting sick, so far all the worry has been related to me getting it, spreading it and causing harm to others.

    Congratulations to you and your family! While I can imagine your fears and worries, you're pregnant in a much better time now than a year ago. JMO Let's face it, babies are still being born and staying healthy along with the mothers. I feel this virus is slowing down and treatments will be better, along with people getting vaccinated; it'll all start looking up. As someone else said, just continue being cautious and taking good care of yourself. Good luck!!
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    edited February 2021
    hipari wrote: »
    My head is in a loop re: vaccines. I’ve always been a vaccine believer and taken everything officials recommend. I recently found out I’m pregnant, and covid vaccines are not approved for pregnant women. This means I can’t get a covid vaccine in the next 8 months, and even after that I don’t know how postpartum and breastfeeding are handled.

    This is the first time ever I have had to rely on others getting vaccinated and forming herd immunity around me, and I don’t like this feeling. This is also the first time I’ve been worried about myself getting sick, so far all the worry has been related to me getting it, spreading it and causing harm to others.

    I think it is criminal that pregnant health care workers in Canada are not being offered the vaccine. Are you not allowed to get it, or you have chosen not to?

    It infuriates me that women are being exposed to a known risk, on order to shield a fetus from a potential risk. I expect that many (maybe most) low risk women would choose not to vaccinate, but I really think is their choice alone, because, bodily autonomy and all that.
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    edited February 2021
    33gail33 wrote: »
    hipari wrote: »
    My head is in a loop re: vaccines. I’ve always been a vaccine believer and taken everything officials recommend. I recently found out I’m pregnant, and covid vaccines are not approved for pregnant women. This means I can’t get a covid vaccine in the next 8 months, and even after that I don’t know how postpartum and breastfeeding are handled.

    This is the first time ever I have had to rely on others getting vaccinated and forming herd immunity around me, and I don’t like this feeling. This is also the first time I’ve been worried about myself getting sick, so far all the worry has been related to me getting it, spreading it and causing harm to others.

    I think it is criminal that pregnant health care workers in Canada are not being offered the vaccine. Are you not allowed to get it, or you have chosen not to?

    It infuriates me that women are being exposed to a known risk, on order to shield a fetus from a potential risk. I expect that many (maybe most) low risk women would choose not to vaccinate, but I really think is their choice alone, because, bodily autonomy and all that.

    If the effects on a pregnant woman and her baby are not yet known--that would be a high liability for the makers of the vaccine, and let's not even think about consequences to the mother and child. Pregnant women cannot use most drugs because of effects. So, how is this "criminal"? Or do you have some studies showing safety?

    Because I believe that a fully autonomous woman's right to life, health and wellbeing always takes precedence over that of any fetus she is carrying, and I oppose any policy or regulation that infringes on that in any way, shape or form.

    I don't believe that any woman should be required to take an action that would risk her life or health in order to protect a fetus she is carrying, and I don't believe that any woman should be required to refuse a treatment that would protect her life or health in order to protect the life or health of a fetus she is carrying.

    The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologist of Canada holds this same view. I am not aware of any studies that show safety, however there are obviously not any studies that show long term safety to anyone with this vaccine, given the emergency nature of the approvals.

    (It is possible that Canada has updated it's procedure on this by now - I haven't looked into it lately.)

    "Consensus Statement: Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding should be offered vaccination at anytime if
    they are eligible and no contraindications exist.
    This decision is based on the women’s personal values and an understanding that the risk of infection and/or
    morbidity from COVID-19 outweighs the theorized and undescribed risk of being vaccinated during pregnancy or
    while breastfeeding. Women should not be precluded from vaccination based on pregnancy status or
    breastfeeding."


    https://sogc.org/common/Uploaded files/Latest News/SOGC_Statement_COVID-19_Vaccination_in_Pregnancy.pdf
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    33gail33 wrote: »
    hipari wrote: »
    My head is in a loop re: vaccines. I’ve always been a vaccine believer and taken everything officials recommend. I recently found out I’m pregnant, and covid vaccines are not approved for pregnant women. This means I can’t get a covid vaccine in the next 8 months, and even after that I don’t know how postpartum and breastfeeding are handled.

    This is the first time ever I have had to rely on others getting vaccinated and forming herd immunity around me, and I don’t like this feeling. This is also the first time I’ve been worried about myself getting sick, so far all the worry has been related to me getting it, spreading it and causing harm to others.

    I think it is criminal that pregnant health care workers in Canada are not being offered the vaccine. Are you not allowed to get it, or you have chosen not to?

    It infuriates me that women are being exposed to a known risk, on order to shield a fetus from a potential risk. I expect that many (maybe most) low risk women would choose not to vaccinate, but I really think is their choice alone, because, bodily autonomy and all that.

    I'm far from an antivaxer, but a woman would have to be crazy to volunteer to have the vaccine when it has never been tested on pregnant women/the effects on babies.

    would you jump up and volunteer to be the first test case and then wait and see what happens when the baby comes out???

    No personally I would not.
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    33gail33 wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    hipari wrote: »
    My head is in a loop re: vaccines. I’ve always been a vaccine believer and taken everything officials recommend. I recently found out I’m pregnant, and covid vaccines are not approved for pregnant women. This means I can’t get a covid vaccine in the next 8 months, and even after that I don’t know how postpartum and breastfeeding are handled.

    This is the first time ever I have had to rely on others getting vaccinated and forming herd immunity around me, and I don’t like this feeling. This is also the first time I’ve been worried about myself getting sick, so far all the worry has been related to me getting it, spreading it and causing harm to others.

    I think it is criminal that pregnant health care workers in Canada are not being offered the vaccine. Are you not allowed to get it, or you have chosen not to?

    It infuriates me that women are being exposed to a known risk, on order to shield a fetus from a potential risk. I expect that many (maybe most) low risk women would choose not to vaccinate, but I really think is their choice alone, because, bodily autonomy and all that.

    If the effects on a pregnant woman and her baby are not yet known--that would be a high liability for the makers of the vaccine, and let's not even think about consequences to the mother and child. Pregnant women cannot use most drugs because of effects. So, how is this "criminal"? Or do you have some studies showing safety?

    Because I believe that a fully autonomous woman's right to life, health and wellbeing always takes precedence over that of any fetus she is carrying, and I oppose any policy or regulation that infringes on that in any way, shape or form.

    I don't believe that any woman should be required to take an action that would risk her life or health in order to protect a fetus she is carrying, and I don't believe that any woman should be required to refuse a treatment that would protect her life or health in order to protect the life or health of a fetus she is carrying.

    The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologist of Canada holds this same view. I am not aware of any studies that show safety, however there are obviously not any studies that show long term safety to anyone with this vaccine, given the emergency nature of the approvals.

    (It is possible that Canada has updated it's procedure on this by now - I haven't looked into it lately.)

    "Consensus Statement: Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding should be offered vaccination at anytime if
    they are eligible and no contraindications exist.
    This decision is based on the women’s personal values and an understanding that the risk of infection and/or
    morbidity from COVID-19 outweighs the theorized and undescribed risk of being vaccinated during pregnancy or
    while breastfeeding. Women should not be precluded from vaccination based on pregnancy status or
    breastfeeding."


    https://sogc.org/common/Uploaded files/Latest News/SOGC_Statement_COVID-19_Vaccination_in_Pregnancy.pdf

    I don't really care about beliefs here. I'm saying that there is liability until proven safe.

    OK - I'm not really overly concerned with the vaccine companies liability issues at this point. I am more concerned that women might die unnecessarily by being refused a vaccine that should be made available to them.