Coronavirus prep
Replies
-
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My SIL texted me that her neighbor had gone to the health dept vaccine clinic nearby for her appt and heard they had a couple of hundred extra J&J shots that they were accepting walk ins for. I put on some real pants and ran down there and within 15 minutes I was vaccinated.
I am on their mailing list and follow them on FB, and there were no emails or posts advertising it. And there were folks there, but no line. I'm so grateful I found out about it, but no idea why they weren't pulling names off the state list and texting people.
So I ran a bit of a fever last night and felt generally achy. I woke up this morning and the fever is gone for now, but the news said the FDA is suggesting the US halt J&J because it's also seeing rare cases of this blood clot disorder. Oh boy
Nate Silver has a valid point if you follow him on Twitter. Basically pointing out that the number of deaths prevented by going forward with the vaccine far outweighs the number of deaths from this blood clot issue. He is right.
From a public health perspective it makes sense, even if 1/1000 people died from the vaccine, the other 999 would be protected from COVID death. But do I want to be that one person who sacrifices myself for the cause? Not really.
I think the main issue here is that we have other vaccines available that don't *seem* to have the same reaction. So is it really ethical to continue using vaccines that do cause this reaction?
As paperpudding suggested that probably depends on how bad the outbreak is in a given place. In Australia it would seem that they could safely wait without too much death and destruction happening. Here in Ontario cases are out of control and our hospitals are getting overwhelmed, so might not be the best idea to wait.
J&J is the only single-dose, and I am hearing from a lot of people that won't do 2, but will take 1. Or they are ok with J&J because it works differently supposedly. In addition, a single-dose works best for transient populations (such as prisons).
Finally, there is that question of how many vaccine doses are available otherwise. Does pulling J&J delay some from getting a vaccine. My understanding is that the answer is Yes... and that's why the risk is so much higher to pull it.
FTR nobody is "sacrificing" themselves - it isn't known if you will be the 1 in 7 million that dies from the vaccine. It is taking a risk of getting Covid (1 in 15,000 deaths if using conservative estimates and incorrectly ignoring compounded spread to others) vs. taking the risk of death from vaccine at 1 in 7,000,000.
My "sacrificing myself" comment was based on my hypothetical 1/1000 scenario regarding risk in general not specific to the 1 in 7 million. However the 1 in 7 million isn't necessarily accurate either as they don't have all the data. For example if elderly populations were vaccinated first (and make up say half of the 7 million) and they react less frequently then the risk to someone 30 years old could be significantly higher. Also they originally said that women were at higher risk for AZ but that could due to the fact that the proportion of women in health care fields is higher, so they got the vaccine first.
All that said the risk does appear to be quite low - but we won't know until a lot more data comes in how low it really is.2 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My SIL texted me that her neighbor had gone to the health dept vaccine clinic nearby for her appt and heard they had a couple of hundred extra J&J shots that they were accepting walk ins for. I put on some real pants and ran down there and within 15 minutes I was vaccinated.
I am on their mailing list and follow them on FB, and there were no emails or posts advertising it. And there were folks there, but no line. I'm so grateful I found out about it, but no idea why they weren't pulling names off the state list and texting people.
So I ran a bit of a fever last night and felt generally achy. I woke up this morning and the fever is gone for now, but the news said the FDA is suggesting the US halt J&J because it's also seeing rare cases of this blood clot disorder. Oh boy
Nate Silver has a valid point if you follow him on Twitter. Basically pointing out that the number of deaths prevented by going forward with the vaccine far outweighs the number of deaths from this blood clot issue. He is right.
From a public health perspective it makes sense, even if 1/1000 people died from the vaccine, the other 999 would be protected from COVID death. But do I want to be that one person who sacrifices myself for the cause? Not really.
I think the main issue here is that we have other vaccines available that don't *seem* to have the same reaction. So is it really ethical to continue using vaccines that do cause this reaction?
As paperpudding suggested that probably depends on how bad the outbreak is in a given place. In Australia it would seem that they could safely wait without too much death and destruction happening. Here in Ontario cases are out of control and our hospitals are getting overwhelmed, so might not be the best idea to wait.
J&J is the only single-dose, and I am hearing from a lot of people that won't do 2, but will take 1. Or they are ok with J&J because it works differently supposedly. In addition, a single-dose works best for transient populations (such as prisons).
Finally, there is that question of how many vaccine doses are available otherwise. Does pulling J&J delay some from getting a vaccine. My understanding is that the answer is Yes... and that's why the risk is so much higher to pull it.
FTR nobody is "sacrificing" themselves - it isn't known if you will be the 1 in 7 million that dies from the vaccine. It is taking a risk of getting Covid (1 in 15,000 deaths if using conservative estimates and incorrectly ignoring compounded spread to others) vs. taking the risk of death from vaccine at 1 in 7,000,000.
My "sacrificing myself" comment was based on my hypothetical 1/1000 scenario regarding risk in general not specific to the 1 in 7 million. However the 1 in 7 million isn't necessarily accurate either as they don't have all the data. For example if elderly populations were vaccinated first (and make up say half of the 7 million) and they react less frequently then the risk to someone 30 years old could be significantly higher. Also they originally said that women were at higher risk for AZ but that could due to the fact that the proportion of women in health care fields is higher, so they got the vaccine first.
All that said the risk does appear to be quite low - but we won't know until a lot more data comes in how low it really is.
Elderly who wanted vaccines got them before J&J became available in US, so highly unlikely that half are elderly. Recipients will skew young.4 -
I thought this was a good piece on the pause and reasons for it/discussion about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/04/13/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots/0
-
I have a digital thermometer, but it is at least 20 years old and not necessarily reliable. My temp runs low these days (97.2 yesterday at the vaccination clinic) so I can feel like I have a fever and be seemingly normal though I don't know if that's the old thermometer or my real temp.1
-
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My SIL texted me that her neighbor had gone to the health dept vaccine clinic nearby for her appt and heard they had a couple of hundred extra J&J shots that they were accepting walk ins for. I put on some real pants and ran down there and within 15 minutes I was vaccinated.
I am on their mailing list and follow them on FB, and there were no emails or posts advertising it. And there were folks there, but no line. I'm so grateful I found out about it, but no idea why they weren't pulling names off the state list and texting people.
So I ran a bit of a fever last night and felt generally achy. I woke up this morning and the fever is gone for now, but the news said the FDA is suggesting the US halt J&J because it's also seeing rare cases of this blood clot disorder. Oh boy
Nate Silver has a valid point if you follow him on Twitter. Basically pointing out that the number of deaths prevented by going forward with the vaccine far outweighs the number of deaths from this blood clot issue. He is right.
From a public health perspective it makes sense, even if 1/1000 people died from the vaccine, the other 999 would be protected from COVID death. But do I want to be that one person who sacrifices myself for the cause? Not really.
I think the main issue here is that we have other vaccines available that don't *seem* to have the same reaction. So is it really ethical to continue using vaccines that do cause this reaction?
As paperpudding suggested that probably depends on how bad the outbreak is in a given place. In Australia it would seem that they could safely wait without too much death and destruction happening. Here in Ontario cases are out of control and our hospitals are getting overwhelmed, so might not be the best idea to wait.
J&J is the only single-dose, and I am hearing from a lot of people that won't do 2, but will take 1. Or they are ok with J&J because it works differently supposedly. In addition, a single-dose works best for transient populations (such as prisons).
Finally, there is that question of how many vaccine doses are available otherwise. Does pulling J&J delay some from getting a vaccine. My understanding is that the answer is Yes... and that's why the risk is so much higher to pull it.
FTR nobody is "sacrificing" themselves - it isn't known if you will be the 1 in 7 million that dies from the vaccine. It is taking a risk of getting Covid (1 in 15,000 deaths if using conservative estimates and incorrectly ignoring compounded spread to others) vs. taking the risk of death from vaccine at 1 in 7,000,000.
My "sacrificing myself" comment was based on my hypothetical 1/1000 scenario regarding risk in general not specific to the 1 in 7 million. However the 1 in 7 million isn't necessarily accurate either as they don't have all the data. For example if elderly populations were vaccinated first (and make up say half of the 7 million) and they react less frequently then the risk to someone 30 years old could be significantly higher. Also they originally said that women were at higher risk for AZ but that could due to the fact that the proportion of women in health care fields is higher, so they got the vaccine first.
All that said the risk does appear to be quite low - but we won't know until a lot more data comes in how low it really is.
Elderly who wanted vaccines got them before J&J became available in US, so highly unlikely that half are elderly. Recipients will skew young.
Yeah I don't know the exact demographics, it was just an example of how the data could be skewed in the early going. I am just saying that the stated 1 in 7 million figure is not likely to be accurate when all the data comes in. Or it may be accurate in absolute numbers, but certain demographics could potentially have a higher risk. There is no way to know that this early on.
FWIW when I said EVEN IF the numbers were 1 per 1000 it would still make sense to use it from a public health perspective, I wasn't suggested that number was accurate either. Simply trying to make the point that looking at things from a public health perspective, yes a few people dying from the vaccine is better than a substantially higher number of people getting Covid and dying. But one person looking at their own personal risk is a different scenario.0 -
Our UK, BBC news report has just had an, involved scientist talking about the risks of clots. He was saying because the underlying "natural" occurrence level in any population of the clotting event are undetermined its is difficult to know how many more have been created by vaccination. He went on to say the numbers known to have these clots because the have the virus are known. He did give the numbers which are greater than any attributed to the vaccine, I've just not carried it this far. He said, the risks associated with having covid and having the clots from it are many more than from the vaccine.4
-
I thought this was a good piece on the pause and reasons for it/discussion about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/04/13/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots/
You're right, this article seems better.
I understand why this next might be so, but I think the general run of news coverage has been hyper-focused on "should we stop" in terms of pandemic spread, which is of course the vital consideration. But it's missing nuance about why one might pause, I think.
I think all of us like it when the information we get about risks, and symptoms to watch out for, is current and accurate (I got a handout at my vax site, but there's much more online from authoritative sources). I think we even *expect* that, would be outraged to learn it wasn't current and that health authorities had strong hints that it was not complete at the time.
Specifically, within that, we expect to get valid information about who *shouldn't* take particular vaccines or drugs, the special cases. I'm not up on what those are for these vaccines specifically - I only paid attention to whether there were contraindications for me 😉 - but I recall there being late questions about good/bad for pregnant women (now resolved, I think), and know that other vaccines are off-limits for people with egg allergies and things like that. We expect to be informed ahead of time about those things.
We don't even have a decent handle on whether there are only 6 cases, without doing some further investigation, though we obviously know there are not huge numbers, or some of the millions who've gotten the vaccines would be dropping like flies.
Beyond that, there's the issue of how to treat the (presumed small) number of cases like this that do arise. The idea that routine treatment for blood clots makes these particular rare clots more deadly is important. Doctors/hospitals need to be informed of this, even if rare, so they don't kill people they could have saved.
The pause allows for some research into the particular cases, to find out if they have something(s) in common, to look into whether there have been more cases but not at first linked to the vaccine . . . then to update written guidance about who should/shouldn't get a specific vaccine, what symptoms people who get it should look out for, how medical professionals should assess & treat the rare cases that do occur, etc.
I feel like this is another case of the system *working*, trying to protect the public and meet its expectations, but with the actions perceived by a segment of the public as mismanagement, incompetence, etc., probably at least in part because the general public doesn't usually see as graphically how this sort of sausage is usually made.8 -
Who here (besides me) bought a pulse oximeter because of COVID?
when myself and a family member both had covid, it was comforting to check my oxygen levels while recovering at home.
Little late to answer this but I did.
Only because I was more worried about dh's risk of getting really sick due to smoking. We did end up getting Covid around Thanksgiving time so it was somewhat comforting to keep an extra eye for any problems before they blew up. 1 -
I thought this was a good piece on the pause and reasons for it/discussion about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/04/13/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-blood-clots/
Beyond that, there's the issue of how to treat the (presumed small) number of cases like this that do arise. The idea that routine treatment for blood clots makes these particular rare clots more deadly is important. Doctors/hospitals need to be informed of this, even if rare, so they don't kill people they could have saved.
This is an issue here in Ontario. We are being told our hospitals are at the breaking point, we had the highest case count ever today, our ICU's are at record capacity, we are bringing in out of region doctors and nurses to help out, they are cancelling routine hospital admissions/surgeries, and we are set to open a temporary field hospital today.
I'm not sure if this is news anywhere else, but *kitten* is real bad here.
I have zero confidence that anyone presenting with a vaccine reaction could access the care they need at this point.11 -
My parents were fully vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine a month ago, I received the J&J vaccine around the same time. I had to take my father to the hospital to replace a defibrillator battery. After about four hours in the ER, they did a COVID test for him, and it was positive.
So, I had to leave the hospital immediately, and I had to get a COVID test per CDC guidelines. It's a surreal feeling when you thought you and yours were protected, but maybe not.
BTW, for those who haven't had the joy of pushing a bristly stick up your own nose and swishing it around your nasal cavity, I recommend it because you can promise yourself a doughnut afterwards. 17 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My SIL texted me that her neighbor had gone to the health dept vaccine clinic nearby for her appt and heard they had a couple of hundred extra J&J shots that they were accepting walk ins for. I put on some real pants and ran down there and within 15 minutes I was vaccinated.
I am on their mailing list and follow them on FB, and there were no emails or posts advertising it. And there were folks there, but no line. I'm so grateful I found out about it, but no idea why they weren't pulling names off the state list and texting people.
So I ran a bit of a fever last night and felt generally achy. I woke up this morning and the fever is gone for now, but the news said the FDA is suggesting the US halt J&J because it's also seeing rare cases of this blood clot disorder. Oh boy
Nate Silver has a valid point if you follow him on Twitter. Basically pointing out that the number of deaths prevented by going forward with the vaccine far outweighs the number of deaths from this blood clot issue. He is right.
From a public health perspective it makes sense, even if 1/1000 people died from the vaccine, the other 999 would be protected from COVID death. But do I want to be that one person who sacrifices myself for the cause? Not really.
I think the main issue here is that we have other vaccines available that don't *seem* to have the same reaction. So is it really ethical to continue using vaccines that do cause this reaction?
As paperpudding suggested that probably depends on how bad the outbreak is in a given place. In Australia it would seem that they could safely wait without too much death and destruction happening. Here in Ontario cases are out of control and our hospitals are getting overwhelmed, so might not be the best idea to wait.
J&J is the only single-dose, and I am hearing from a lot of people that won't do 2, but will take 1. Or they are ok with J&J because it works differently supposedly. In addition, a single-dose works best for transient populations (such as prisons).
Finally, there is that question of how many vaccine doses are available otherwise. Does pulling J&J delay some from getting a vaccine. My understanding is that the answer is Yes... and that's why the risk is so much higher to pull it.
FTR nobody is "sacrificing" themselves - it isn't known if you will be the 1 in 7 million that dies from the vaccine. It is taking a risk of getting Covid (1 in 15,000 deaths if using conservative estimates and incorrectly ignoring compounded spread to others) vs. taking the risk of death from vaccine at 1 in 7,000,000.
My "sacrificing myself" comment was based on my hypothetical 1/1000 scenario regarding risk in general not specific to the 1 in 7 million. However the 1 in 7 million isn't necessarily accurate either as they don't have all the data. For example if elderly populations were vaccinated first (and make up say half of the 7 million) and they react less frequently then the risk to someone 30 years old could be significantly higher. Also they originally said that women were at higher risk for AZ but that could due to the fact that the proportion of women in health care fields is higher, so they got the vaccine first.
All that said the risk does appear to be quite low - but we won't know until a lot more data comes in how low it really is.
Elderly who wanted vaccines got them before J&J became available in US, so highly unlikely that half are elderly. Recipients will skew young.
Yeah I don't know the exact demographics, it was just an example of how the data could be skewed in the early going. I am just saying that the stated 1 in 7 million figure is not likely to be accurate when all the data comes in. Or it may be accurate in absolute numbers, but certain demographics could potentially have a higher risk. There is no way to know that this early on.
FWIW when I said EVEN IF the numbers were 1 per 1000 it would still make sense to use it from a public health perspective, I wasn't suggested that number was accurate either. Simply trying to make the point that looking at things from a public health perspective, yes a few people dying from the vaccine is better than a substantially higher number of people getting Covid and dying. But one person looking at their own personal risk is a different scenario.
Why or how is it different, to you?
I'm curious because I pretty much use population probabilities to assess personal risk of (whatever), though admittedly slightly tempered by my individual circumstances if they seem to bear on the specific situation. As an example of the latter, some things are riskier for me because of age, or medical history, than they might be for the population average. Sometimes it can be hard, as an individual, to take the emotion out of such decisions, but to me that's a rational thing to strive for.5 -
My parents were fully vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine a month ago, I received the J&J vaccine around the same time. I had to take my father to the hospital to replace a defibrillator battery. After about four hours in the ER, they did a COVID test for him, and it was positive.
So, I had to leave the hospital immediately, and I had to get a COVID test per CDC guidelines. It's a surreal feeling when you thought you and yours were protected, but maybe not.
BTW, for those who haven't had the joy of pushing a bristly stick up your own nose and swishing it around your nasal cavity, I recommend it because you can promise yourself a doughnut afterwards.
We are not completely out of the woods until we get herd immunity. We still need to follow safety protocols, and the CDC is investigating why some people got infected after vaccination, and some of them got seriously ill. Maybe the new strands, maybe vaccinated people feels too safe. Who knows! Sorry to hear about your father and I hope that you are well. Maybe your mom should be checked as well. Time to wear a mask inside the house.
So far, 5,800 fully vaccinated people have caught Covid anyway in US, CDC says
Click the link to read the full article
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/14/health/breakthrough-infections-covid-vaccines-cdc/index.html0 -
My parents were fully vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine a month ago, I received the J&J vaccine around the same time. I had to take my father to the hospital to replace a defibrillator battery. After about four hours in the ER, they did a COVID test for him, and it was positive.
So, I had to leave the hospital immediately, and I had to get a COVID test per CDC guidelines. It's a surreal feeling when you thought you and yours were protected, but maybe not.
BTW, for those who haven't had the joy of pushing a bristly stick up your own nose and swishing it around your nasal cavity, I recommend it because you can promise yourself a doughnut afterwards.
We are not completely out of the woods until we get herd immunity. We still need to follow safety protocols, and the CDC is investigating why some people got infected after vaccination, and some of them got seriously ill. Maybe the new strands, maybe vaccinated people feels too safe. Who knows! Sorry to hear about your father and I hope that you are well. Maybe your mom should be checked as well. Time to wear a mask inside the house.
So far, 5,800 fully vaccinated people have caught Covid anyway in US, CDC says
Click the link to read the full article
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/14/health/breakthrough-infections-covid-vaccines-cdc/index.html
We're not completely out of the woods even after we achieve herd immunity, assuming we ever do. (The unvaccinated world-wide are a petri dish for creating new variants, for one.)
AFAIK, we've only eradicated one disease via vaccines (smallpox). Others, for which we have vaccines and even reasonable herd immunity, still claim lives (TB, measles, polio, etc.).
The Covid vaccines are very effective, according to all available measures . . . but we know they're not 100% effective. There will be breakthrough cases, as with some other vaccines. It's a combination of being personally resistant to the infection, plus reducing likelihood of being exposed to the disease, that reduces incidence of infection.7 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My SIL texted me that her neighbor had gone to the health dept vaccine clinic nearby for her appt and heard they had a couple of hundred extra J&J shots that they were accepting walk ins for. I put on some real pants and ran down there and within 15 minutes I was vaccinated.
I am on their mailing list and follow them on FB, and there were no emails or posts advertising it. And there were folks there, but no line. I'm so grateful I found out about it, but no idea why they weren't pulling names off the state list and texting people.
So I ran a bit of a fever last night and felt generally achy. I woke up this morning and the fever is gone for now, but the news said the FDA is suggesting the US halt J&J because it's also seeing rare cases of this blood clot disorder. Oh boy
Nate Silver has a valid point if you follow him on Twitter. Basically pointing out that the number of deaths prevented by going forward with the vaccine far outweighs the number of deaths from this blood clot issue. He is right.
From a public health perspective it makes sense, even if 1/1000 people died from the vaccine, the other 999 would be protected from COVID death. But do I want to be that one person who sacrifices myself for the cause? Not really.
I think the main issue here is that we have other vaccines available that don't *seem* to have the same reaction. So is it really ethical to continue using vaccines that do cause this reaction?
As paperpudding suggested that probably depends on how bad the outbreak is in a given place. In Australia it would seem that they could safely wait without too much death and destruction happening. Here in Ontario cases are out of control and our hospitals are getting overwhelmed, so might not be the best idea to wait.
J&J is the only single-dose, and I am hearing from a lot of people that won't do 2, but will take 1. Or they are ok with J&J because it works differently supposedly. In addition, a single-dose works best for transient populations (such as prisons).
Finally, there is that question of how many vaccine doses are available otherwise. Does pulling J&J delay some from getting a vaccine. My understanding is that the answer is Yes... and that's why the risk is so much higher to pull it.
FTR nobody is "sacrificing" themselves - it isn't known if you will be the 1 in 7 million that dies from the vaccine. It is taking a risk of getting Covid (1 in 15,000 deaths if using conservative estimates and incorrectly ignoring compounded spread to others) vs. taking the risk of death from vaccine at 1 in 7,000,000.
My "sacrificing myself" comment was based on my hypothetical 1/1000 scenario regarding risk in general not specific to the 1 in 7 million. However the 1 in 7 million isn't necessarily accurate either as they don't have all the data. For example if elderly populations were vaccinated first (and make up say half of the 7 million) and they react less frequently then the risk to someone 30 years old could be significantly higher. Also they originally said that women were at higher risk for AZ but that could due to the fact that the proportion of women in health care fields is higher, so they got the vaccine first.
All that said the risk does appear to be quite low - but we won't know until a lot more data comes in how low it really is.
Elderly who wanted vaccines got them before J&J became available in US, so highly unlikely that half are elderly. Recipients will skew young.
Yeah I don't know the exact demographics, it was just an example of how the data could be skewed in the early going. I am just saying that the stated 1 in 7 million figure is not likely to be accurate when all the data comes in. Or it may be accurate in absolute numbers, but certain demographics could potentially have a higher risk. There is no way to know that this early on.
FWIW when I said EVEN IF the numbers were 1 per 1000 it would still make sense to use it from a public health perspective, I wasn't suggested that number was accurate either. Simply trying to make the point that looking at things from a public health perspective, yes a few people dying from the vaccine is better than a substantially higher number of people getting Covid and dying. But one person looking at their own personal risk is a different scenario.
Why or how is it different, to you?
I'm curious because I pretty much use population probabilities to assess personal risk of (whatever), though admittedly slightly tempered by my individual circumstances if they seem to bear on the specific situation. As an example of the latter, some things are riskier for me because of age, or medical history, than they might be for the population average. Sometimes it can be hard, as an individual, to take the emotion out of such decisions, but to me that's a rational thing to strive for.
From a public health perspective it is better that I take the vaccine and die, rather than refuse the vaccine and risk getting and spreading Covid. In the grand scheme of things a few deaths "for the greater good" are acceptable. From an individual perspective it might not be acceptable to die "for the greater good" - if one had that choice.
But of course we don't know which of us are going to have an adverse reaction so yes of course we have to assess that by population probabilities.4 -
My parents were fully vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine a month ago, I received the J&J vaccine around the same time. I had to take my father to the hospital to replace a defibrillator battery. After about four hours in the ER, they did a COVID test for him, and it was positive.
So, I had to leave the hospital immediately, and I had to get a COVID test per CDC guidelines. It's a surreal feeling when you thought you and yours were protected, but maybe not.
BTW, for those who haven't had the joy of pushing a bristly stick up your own nose and swishing it around your nasal cavity, I recommend it because you can promise yourself a doughnut afterwards.
Hopefully it will protect him from becoming severely ill - I think that was the original goal of the vaccine - not sterilizing immunity. My understanding is that the Pfizer vaccine does prevent serious illness in almost all cases.
(I get a covid test every week - surprisingly you get used to it.)4 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My SIL texted me that her neighbor had gone to the health dept vaccine clinic nearby for her appt and heard they had a couple of hundred extra J&J shots that they were accepting walk ins for. I put on some real pants and ran down there and within 15 minutes I was vaccinated.
I am on their mailing list and follow them on FB, and there were no emails or posts advertising it. And there were folks there, but no line. I'm so grateful I found out about it, but no idea why they weren't pulling names off the state list and texting people.
So I ran a bit of a fever last night and felt generally achy. I woke up this morning and the fever is gone for now, but the news said the FDA is suggesting the US halt J&J because it's also seeing rare cases of this blood clot disorder. Oh boy
Nate Silver has a valid point if you follow him on Twitter. Basically pointing out that the number of deaths prevented by going forward with the vaccine far outweighs the number of deaths from this blood clot issue. He is right.
From a public health perspective it makes sense, even if 1/1000 people died from the vaccine, the other 999 would be protected from COVID death. But do I want to be that one person who sacrifices myself for the cause? Not really.
I think the main issue here is that we have other vaccines available that don't *seem* to have the same reaction. So is it really ethical to continue using vaccines that do cause this reaction?
As paperpudding suggested that probably depends on how bad the outbreak is in a given place. In Australia it would seem that they could safely wait without too much death and destruction happening. Here in Ontario cases are out of control and our hospitals are getting overwhelmed, so might not be the best idea to wait.
J&J is the only single-dose, and I am hearing from a lot of people that won't do 2, but will take 1. Or they are ok with J&J because it works differently supposedly. In addition, a single-dose works best for transient populations (such as prisons).
Finally, there is that question of how many vaccine doses are available otherwise. Does pulling J&J delay some from getting a vaccine. My understanding is that the answer is Yes... and that's why the risk is so much higher to pull it.
FTR nobody is "sacrificing" themselves - it isn't known if you will be the 1 in 7 million that dies from the vaccine. It is taking a risk of getting Covid (1 in 15,000 deaths if using conservative estimates and incorrectly ignoring compounded spread to others) vs. taking the risk of death from vaccine at 1 in 7,000,000.
My "sacrificing myself" comment was based on my hypothetical 1/1000 scenario regarding risk in general not specific to the 1 in 7 million. However the 1 in 7 million isn't necessarily accurate either as they don't have all the data. For example if elderly populations were vaccinated first (and make up say half of the 7 million) and they react less frequently then the risk to someone 30 years old could be significantly higher. Also they originally said that women were at higher risk for AZ but that could due to the fact that the proportion of women in health care fields is higher, so they got the vaccine first.
All that said the risk does appear to be quite low - but we won't know until a lot more data comes in how low it really is.
Elderly who wanted vaccines got them before J&J became available in US, so highly unlikely that half are elderly. Recipients will skew young.
Yeah I don't know the exact demographics, it was just an example of how the data could be skewed in the early going. I am just saying that the stated 1 in 7 million figure is not likely to be accurate when all the data comes in. Or it may be accurate in absolute numbers, but certain demographics could potentially have a higher risk. There is no way to know that this early on.
FWIW when I said EVEN IF the numbers were 1 per 1000 it would still make sense to use it from a public health perspective, I wasn't suggested that number was accurate either. Simply trying to make the point that looking at things from a public health perspective, yes a few people dying from the vaccine is better than a substantially higher number of people getting Covid and dying. But one person looking at their own personal risk is a different scenario.
Why or how is it different, to you?
I'm curious because I pretty much use population probabilities to assess personal risk of (whatever), though admittedly slightly tempered by my individual circumstances if they seem to bear on the specific situation. As an example of the latter, some things are riskier for me because of age, or medical history, than they might be for the population average. Sometimes it can be hard, as an individual, to take the emotion out of such decisions, but to me that's a rational thing to strive for.
From a public health perspective it is better that I take the vaccine and die, rather than refuse the vaccine and risk getting and spreading Covid. In the grand scheme of things a few deaths "for the greater good" are acceptable. From an individual perspective it might not be acceptable to die "for the greater good" - if one had that choice.
But of course we don't know which of us are going to have an adverse reaction so yes of course we have to assess that by population probabilities.
Thanks for answering (especially since a couple of people seem to have disagreed with me for even asking!). In practice, it sounds like we see it in similar ways.
I keep reading people (not you at all, and others not just on MFP) getting really freaked out about the personal risk of the rare blood clot effect, which is small, so not wanting the vaccine . . . when (here, but not everywhere) the statistical risk (of getting Covid + having horrible side effects including potentially death from it) is actually higher.
I don't know how to see that, except as a primarily emotional reaction to dramatic anecdotes, anecdotes currently getting more publicity in part because they *are* unusual, and the Covid deaths/disabilities have become more like background noise in the news, not dramatic anecdotes anymore.5 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My SIL texted me that her neighbor had gone to the health dept vaccine clinic nearby for her appt and heard they had a couple of hundred extra J&J shots that they were accepting walk ins for. I put on some real pants and ran down there and within 15 minutes I was vaccinated.
I am on their mailing list and follow them on FB, and there were no emails or posts advertising it. And there were folks there, but no line. I'm so grateful I found out about it, but no idea why they weren't pulling names off the state list and texting people.
So I ran a bit of a fever last night and felt generally achy. I woke up this morning and the fever is gone for now, but the news said the FDA is suggesting the US halt J&J because it's also seeing rare cases of this blood clot disorder. Oh boy
Nate Silver has a valid point if you follow him on Twitter. Basically pointing out that the number of deaths prevented by going forward with the vaccine far outweighs the number of deaths from this blood clot issue. He is right.
From a public health perspective it makes sense, even if 1/1000 people died from the vaccine, the other 999 would be protected from COVID death. But do I want to be that one person who sacrifices myself for the cause? Not really.
I think the main issue here is that we have other vaccines available that don't *seem* to have the same reaction. So is it really ethical to continue using vaccines that do cause this reaction?
As paperpudding suggested that probably depends on how bad the outbreak is in a given place. In Australia it would seem that they could safely wait without too much death and destruction happening. Here in Ontario cases are out of control and our hospitals are getting overwhelmed, so might not be the best idea to wait.
J&J is the only single-dose, and I am hearing from a lot of people that won't do 2, but will take 1. Or they are ok with J&J because it works differently supposedly. In addition, a single-dose works best for transient populations (such as prisons).
Finally, there is that question of how many vaccine doses are available otherwise. Does pulling J&J delay some from getting a vaccine. My understanding is that the answer is Yes... and that's why the risk is so much higher to pull it.
FTR nobody is "sacrificing" themselves - it isn't known if you will be the 1 in 7 million that dies from the vaccine. It is taking a risk of getting Covid (1 in 15,000 deaths if using conservative estimates and incorrectly ignoring compounded spread to others) vs. taking the risk of death from vaccine at 1 in 7,000,000.
My "sacrificing myself" comment was based on my hypothetical 1/1000 scenario regarding risk in general not specific to the 1 in 7 million. However the 1 in 7 million isn't necessarily accurate either as they don't have all the data. For example if elderly populations were vaccinated first (and make up say half of the 7 million) and they react less frequently then the risk to someone 30 years old could be significantly higher. Also they originally said that women were at higher risk for AZ but that could due to the fact that the proportion of women in health care fields is higher, so they got the vaccine first.
All that said the risk does appear to be quite low - but we won't know until a lot more data comes in how low it really is.
Elderly who wanted vaccines got them before J&J became available in US, so highly unlikely that half are elderly. Recipients will skew young.
Yeah I don't know the exact demographics, it was just an example of how the data could be skewed in the early going. I am just saying that the stated 1 in 7 million figure is not likely to be accurate when all the data comes in. Or it may be accurate in absolute numbers, but certain demographics could potentially have a higher risk. There is no way to know that this early on.
FWIW when I said EVEN IF the numbers were 1 per 1000 it would still make sense to use it from a public health perspective, I wasn't suggested that number was accurate either. Simply trying to make the point that looking at things from a public health perspective, yes a few people dying from the vaccine is better than a substantially higher number of people getting Covid and dying. But one person looking at their own personal risk is a different scenario.
Why or how is it different, to you?
I'm curious because I pretty much use population probabilities to assess personal risk of (whatever), though admittedly slightly tempered by my individual circumstances if they seem to bear on the specific situation. As an example of the latter, some things are riskier for me because of age, or medical history, than they might be for the population average. Sometimes it can be hard, as an individual, to take the emotion out of such decisions, but to me that's a rational thing to strive for.
From a public health perspective it is better that I take the vaccine and die, rather than refuse the vaccine and risk getting and spreading Covid. In the grand scheme of things a few deaths "for the greater good" are acceptable. From an individual perspective it might not be acceptable to die "for the greater good" - if one had that choice.
But of course we don't know which of us are going to have an adverse reaction so yes of course we have to assess that by population probabilities.
Thanks for answering (especially since a couple of people seem to have disagreed with me for even asking!). In practice, it sounds like we see it in similar ways.
I keep reading people (not you at all, and others not just on MFP) getting really freaked out about the personal risk of the rare blood clot effect, which is small, so not wanting the vaccine . . . when (here, but not everywhere) the statistical risk (of getting Covid + having horrible side effects including potentially death from it) is actually higher.
I don't know how to see that, except as a primarily emotional reaction to dramatic anecdotes, anecdotes currently getting more publicity in part because they *are* unusual, and the Covid deaths/disabilities have become more like background noise in the news, not dramatic anecdotes anymore.
I had Pfizer so I don't have to make that choice, I believe that I would have taken the first vaccine offered to me, but that is easy for me to say now.
My sister and best friend are both about 10 days out from receiving their first Astra Zeneca vaccine, and while I don't expect them to have any serious adverse reactions, I will still be happy when the risk time period is up. It's just something that is the back of your mind with all the news about it.3 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My SIL texted me that her neighbor had gone to the health dept vaccine clinic nearby for her appt and heard they had a couple of hundred extra J&J shots that they were accepting walk ins for. I put on some real pants and ran down there and within 15 minutes I was vaccinated.
I am on their mailing list and follow them on FB, and there were no emails or posts advertising it. And there were folks there, but no line. I'm so grateful I found out about it, but no idea why they weren't pulling names off the state list and texting people.
So I ran a bit of a fever last night and felt generally achy. I woke up this morning and the fever is gone for now, but the news said the FDA is suggesting the US halt J&J because it's also seeing rare cases of this blood clot disorder. Oh boy
Nate Silver has a valid point if you follow him on Twitter. Basically pointing out that the number of deaths prevented by going forward with the vaccine far outweighs the number of deaths from this blood clot issue. He is right.
From a public health perspective it makes sense, even if 1/1000 people died from the vaccine, the other 999 would be protected from COVID death. But do I want to be that one person who sacrifices myself for the cause? Not really.
I think the main issue here is that we have other vaccines available that don't *seem* to have the same reaction. So is it really ethical to continue using vaccines that do cause this reaction?
As paperpudding suggested that probably depends on how bad the outbreak is in a given place. In Australia it would seem that they could safely wait without too much death and destruction happening. Here in Ontario cases are out of control and our hospitals are getting overwhelmed, so might not be the best idea to wait.
J&J is the only single-dose, and I am hearing from a lot of people that won't do 2, but will take 1. Or they are ok with J&J because it works differently supposedly. In addition, a single-dose works best for transient populations (such as prisons).
Finally, there is that question of how many vaccine doses are available otherwise. Does pulling J&J delay some from getting a vaccine. My understanding is that the answer is Yes... and that's why the risk is so much higher to pull it.
FTR nobody is "sacrificing" themselves - it isn't known if you will be the 1 in 7 million that dies from the vaccine. It is taking a risk of getting Covid (1 in 15,000 deaths if using conservative estimates and incorrectly ignoring compounded spread to others) vs. taking the risk of death from vaccine at 1 in 7,000,000.
My "sacrificing myself" comment was based on my hypothetical 1/1000 scenario regarding risk in general not specific to the 1 in 7 million. However the 1 in 7 million isn't necessarily accurate either as they don't have all the data. For example if elderly populations were vaccinated first (and make up say half of the 7 million) and they react less frequently then the risk to someone 30 years old could be significantly higher. Also they originally said that women were at higher risk for AZ but that could due to the fact that the proportion of women in health care fields is higher, so they got the vaccine first.
All that said the risk does appear to be quite low - but we won't know until a lot more data comes in how low it really is.
Elderly who wanted vaccines got them before J&J became available in US, so highly unlikely that half are elderly. Recipients will skew young.
Yeah I don't know the exact demographics, it was just an example of how the data could be skewed in the early going. I am just saying that the stated 1 in 7 million figure is not likely to be accurate when all the data comes in. Or it may be accurate in absolute numbers, but certain demographics could potentially have a higher risk. There is no way to know that this early on.
FWIW when I said EVEN IF the numbers were 1 per 1000 it would still make sense to use it from a public health perspective, I wasn't suggested that number was accurate either. Simply trying to make the point that looking at things from a public health perspective, yes a few people dying from the vaccine is better than a substantially higher number of people getting Covid and dying. But one person looking at their own personal risk is a different scenario.
Why or how is it different, to you?
I'm curious because I pretty much use population probabilities to assess personal risk of (whatever), though admittedly slightly tempered by my individual circumstances if they seem to bear on the specific situation. As an example of the latter, some things are riskier for me because of age, or medical history, than they might be for the population average. Sometimes it can be hard, as an individual, to take the emotion out of such decisions, but to me that's a rational thing to strive for.
In this particular case, IF we found out that the J&J blood clot thing is something that really happens with women in their 40s or younger, or women also with some other risk factor, and not men or older women, then it might make sense to use the J&J for the other groups. I can see a 30 yo woman who can work from home and doesn't have trouble social distancing thinking it would -- hypothetically -- make more sense to wait for one of the other vaccines even now (if the pause didn't happen), or to wait until they have more understanding of what is going on vs the likelihood that person would get covid (especially since covid itself is generally not very dangerous for that person if she did get it in the few extra weeks). (Which is also related to why I found the reasoning for the pause in the article I linked somewhat convincing -- that it should be a short pause and focused on getting more information.)
I'll also say that I would happily have taken any of the vaccines (got shot 2 of Pfizer today) and that whatever it is that makes me not particularly worried about what would happen if I got covid (although I've been social distancing and masking and so on, since I don't want to accidentally contribute to further spread, especially given that I can recall how bad things got here, makes me not concerned about any of the low risk vaccine things that could happen. I find the anti vax (NOT talking about anyone in this discussion) position of "covid doesn't scare me but the vaccine is super risky" position kind of hard to get, personally.
I also have been surprised at the anecdotal stories I've heard of people who were scheduled to get J&J being able to get another vaccine instead without much of a longer wait (this week or next), so am pleased that availability in the US does seem to have really opened up.3 -
Astra zeneca has been suspended for under 50's in Australia unless really high risk situations.
Those who have already had one dose can have second dose though.
AZ still continuing for over 50's (those meeting phase1 a or b criteria) - pfizer has very limited availability - both in terms of quantities and location - ie regional areas like where I live just don't have Pfizer at all
I will continue on and have my second AZ - 12 week interval between doses -(as a health worker therefore in phase1b criteria) and anyway I am over 502 -
SuzySunshine99 wrote: »SummerSkier wrote: »In a related question to the pulse oximeter (which my Apple watch has one and sometimes it is accurate LOL). How many folks do NOT have a thermometer? I am constantly astounded to hear friends tell me when I ask if they are running a fever that they do not have one......I will admit that without children prior to having the flu in early 2018, I only had a couple old ones which the batteries were dead on, but with Covid, I have at least 1 which runs mechanically (not mercury but another chemical which is just as difficult to read) and 2 which are digital.
I think it is way more common to have one if you have kids.
I had an old, nearly dead digital one that I hadn't used in a while...it got some use early on in the pandemic, when I was paranoid and taking my temperature every day.
I just replaced it with a new digital one, and put it to good use! Got to tell the CDC survey exactly how high my fever was after my second vaccine dose!
No kids here. Had to buy one. Only could find a basal thermometer. Still works the same, just thought it was funny (too old to have kids).
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions