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.
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 -
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.
At least here in California, the J&J vaccine was also very popular for and among the homeless population here because it was one dose. I would guess that's the case elsewhere as well, too. Our Public Health/COVID Response Director said the pause in administering J&J was also likely to give time to track down those who might have had side effects as they might not be readily identifiable as CVST or that they are related to the vaccine, given that the reactions have occurred at least six days after the person received the vaccine.5 -
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).
When I started reading, for a quick second I thought you bought a kid . . . 😬19 -
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.
I am kind of concerned about this happening.
I hope your father’s case is mild. Did your mother get tested as well? Wishing you and your family the best possible outcome.6 -
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 personally think it comes down to personal responsibility-blame-victim thematic. If you get covid-19 despite following all the social distancing, hygiene and protection protocols, it’s not your fault (and people who don’t practice these safety precautions don’t tend to think it’s their fault either since they’re living a normal life they were always taught to live). You didn’t actively do anything to get it, you were just hit with bad luck and got it because the world sucks. You are the victim of your surroundings / bad luck / incompetent government / that coughing idiot at the store, depending what you believe in, but it wasn’t your fault. If you make the personal decision to go and get vaccinated and get a bad reaction, you are essentially having a reaction to something you actively chose and thus you have nobody to blame but yourself. It’s always easier to blame the negative events of our lives on someone, anyone, else than ourselves. Accepting personal responsibility is hard, and many don’t see choosing to not take the vaccine as an active choice of exposing themselves to covid, but as maintaining the status quo where they don’t have the choice in whether they get it.6 -
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.
At least here in California, the J&J vaccine was also very popular for and among the homeless population here because it was one dose. I would guess that's the case elsewhere as well, too. Our Public Health/COVID Response Director said the pause in administering J&J was also likely to give time to track down those who might have had side effects as they might not be readily identifiable as CVST or that they are related to the vaccine, given that the reactions have occurred at least six days after the person received the vaccine.
Yeah, there is a cost to any time lost with the J&J vaxx because there are a number of people for whom getting them in (or going to them) more than once is unlikely or at least difficult. It was kind of apropos that J&J was coming in late behind the first two in the US, as it was going to be most useful in disadvantaged populations that would be lagging behind the haves anyway.
If they were using the pause to see if this was a larger problem that would reveal itself now that it was known, it doesn't appear like that's happened so far. Hopefully they are updating the fact sheet, getting the word out to the HC community how to treat this rare situation, and then they'll open it back up. If someone who has access to the other shots and no medical reason to avoid them want to choose to not get J&J and look for an mRna shot that's fine, but we are in a race so I hope this is a short pause.7 -
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.
Late to the party, but chiming in...
I bought one after learning about them here, on this thread. Those of you who are knowledgeable and breaking down some of the science for those of us who don't speak it well have been SO helpful. I have learned to much through this discussion. I was just telling my 85+ year old parents today that of all places, a calorie counting /fitness board has helped me to understand this virus, how it spreads, the differences between the vaccines and more. I can't always remember all of the facts to dispute misinformation in the moment, but I know what I need to do to stay safe and why we need to keep doing it, thanks to some really smart people here 16 -
Got shot 2 of Pfizer yesterday late afternoon, and am feeling fine today. Had minor arm pain w/in a couple of hours (and still, but this is very minor, as with shot one it wouldn't stop me working out or even doing arm day), and unlike shot one feel generally a little under the weather (but like a minor flu or medium cold without coughing or sneezing -- bit tired, slightly sore, just not energetic). Felt worse (bit feverish, but no actual temp so might have been in my head), and more bodily exhaustion earlier in the day, then energetic, now kind of tired. Overall, no biggie, happy to be vaccinated and looking forward to a couple of weeks from now when I firmly intend (with a mask) to go to a restaurant and to the movies and when possible work-wise to go visit my dad in WA.12
-
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/04/vaccine-related-blood-clot-mystery-must-be-solved/618623/
I thought this was an interesting article about some theories on the blood clot issues.1 -
Got shot 2 of Pfizer yesterday late afternoon, and am feeling fine today. Had minor arm pain w/in a couple of hours (and still, but this is very minor, as with shot one it wouldn't stop me working out or even doing arm day), and unlike shot one feel generally a little under the weather (but like a minor flu or medium cold without coughing or sneezing -- bit tired, slightly sore, just not energetic). Felt worse (bit feverish, but no actual temp so might have been in my head), and more bodily exhaustion earlier in the day, then energetic, now kind of tired. Overall, no biggie, happy to be vaccinated and looking forward to a couple of weeks from now when I firmly intend (with a mask) to go to a restaurant and to the movies and when possible work-wise to go visit my dad in WA.
I had my second shot on the 14th and had a very similar experience except my timeline was somewhat delayed - fatigue hit after dinner last night, etc. Am feeling fine today.
Did have some blurred vision this AM but can now see the computer with my regular glasses again.5 -
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).
When I started reading, for a quick second I thought you bought a kid . . . 😬
Me too!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.
At least here in California, the J&J vaccine was also very popular for and among the homeless population here because it was one dose. I would guess that's the case elsewhere as well, too. Our Public Health/COVID Response Director said the pause in administering J&J was also likely to give time to track down those who might have had side effects as they might not be readily identifiable as CVST or that they are related to the vaccine, given that the reactions have occurred at least six days after the person received the vaccine.
Yes, I've also heard this about the J&J vaccine being preferable to give the homeless.0 -
missysippy930 wrote: »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.
I am kind of concerned about this happening.
I hope your father’s case is mild. Did your mother get tested as well? Wishing you and your family the best possible outcome.
Actually, he has no symptoms at all, which is why it was such a shock that he tested positive. He was discharged this morning, and both my mother and brother had negative tests. Mine hasn't come back yet, but other than exhausted from all this drama, I feel OK, too.
I did eat *way* too many m&ms and Reece's pieces when I came home, and enjoyed my two sugar-free margarita shooters. Back on the wagon tomorrow. Thanks for asking! 😊13 -
I happened to be on my way to the register at Walmart today (I go there every couple of months to stock up on the only litter my cat will accept) when over the loudspeaker they announced that anyone over 16 could come to the pharmacy and get the Moderna vax as a walk in. (California)
It was such a fight 2 months ago to find a spot anywhere in the county for my frontline worker husband that I thought I'd never get it. They still had long lines at the stadium a few days ago, so I thought wow, better check out the stampede as I pass by the pharmacy.
There was no stampede, no crowd, not even a line! There was no wait, no one at the window ahead of me, so I went for it. It was almost too easy...😉 The tech said they'd just started giving them this week so a lot of people don't know about it.
It's kind of a relief that I won't have the same stress hunting down the vax that everyone else I know has had. I'll be able to go on my birthday trip at the end of next month with both doses done! ⭐
I was initially hoping to find somewhere I could get a one-and-done J&J vax, cuz I don't enjoy shots, but my sister so eloquently pointed out to me that, "as a woman of a certain age" I might want to rethink it. I guess I'll be putting up with two jabs instead of one.
P.S. the initial shot itself was slightly uncomfortable, with the needle busting through the muscle and all, but after the poke, it's been less of a reaction than the flu shot for me. I usually feel fluish within an hour and kinda blah the first night after a flu shot. This one was like nothing at all, but a slightly sore arm that came on a few hours later. We'll see how round 2 goes...
18 -
girlwithcurls2 wrote: »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.
Late to the party, but chiming in...
I bought one after learning about them here, on this thread. Those of you who are knowledgeable and breaking down some of the science for those of us who don't speak it well have been SO helpful. I have learned to much through this discussion. I was just telling my 85+ year old parents today that of all places, a calorie counting /fitness board has helped me to understand this virus, how it spreads, the differences between the vaccines and more. I can't always remember all of the facts to dispute misinformation in the moment, but I know what I need to do to stay safe and why we need to keep doing it, thanks to some really smart people here
That describes perfectly how I feel about all the virus info here. I'd much rather read what you all know about it than wade through all the social media propaganda every where else. I feel I can depend on the wisdom here. And this place was exactly why I purchased an oximeter as well. Maybe you guys all deserve a percentage from Amazon oximeter sales. 13 -
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/04/vaccine-related-blood-clot-mystery-must-be-solved/618623/
I thought this was an interesting article about some theories on the blood clot issues.
that is a great link. A bit too tech for me as it delved into a lot of things but encouraging to see there are clues and possible answers. I have been wondering if the clotting side effect was also similar to the clotting issue with covid and thinking that if those same people got sick with Covid they might ALSO have had that reaction. Just rambling (my disagree person doesn't need to disagree with EVERY post I make do they?)
7 -
Australia and New Zealand started our Trans-Tasman bubble as of yesterday so we are free to travel between the two countries even unvaccinated and without testing. I hope this works out well. It's so nice seeing so many family and friends finally reunited! I would feel better about it if we'd have to do one of those rapid diagnostic tests though at the very least. Also it is quarantine-free travel.11
-
Interesting and informative article for everyone to read and pass on. Click the link below to read the full information.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/19/health/cdc-covid-guidelines-cleaning/index.html
"CDC determined that the risk of surface transmission is low, and secondary to the primary routes of virus transmission through direct contact droplets and aerosols," Vincent Hill, Chief of the Waterborne Disease Prevention Branch, said on a CDC-sponsored telephone briefing.
...Hill said the risk of transmission from touching a surface, while small, is elevated indoors. Outdoors, the sun and other factors can destroy viruses, Hill said.
Household cleaners pose a danger
...Hill cited CDC research from June of 2020 showing that, of those people surveyed, "only 58% knew that bleach should not be mixed with ammonia, because mixing bleach and ammonia creates a toxic gas that harms people's lungs."
"Nineteen percent wash food products with bleach, which could lead to their consumption of bleach that isn't washed off, which can damage the body because bleach is toxic. Eighteen percent used household cleaner on bare skin, which can damage the skin and cause rashes and burns," Hill said.2 -
Interesting and informative article for everyone to read and pass on. Click the link below to read the full information.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/19/health/cdc-covid-guidelines-cleaning/index.html
"CDC determined that the risk of surface transmission is low, and secondary to the primary routes of virus transmission through direct contact droplets and aerosols," Vincent Hill, Chief of the Waterborne Disease Prevention Branch, said on a CDC-sponsored telephone briefing.
...Hill said the risk of transmission from touching a surface, while small, is elevated indoors. Outdoors, the sun and other factors can destroy viruses, Hill said.
Household cleaners pose a danger
...Hill cited CDC research from June of 2020 showing that, of those people surveyed, "only 58% knew that bleach should not be mixed with ammonia, because mixing bleach and ammonia creates a toxic gas that harms people's lungs."
"Nineteen percent wash food products with bleach, which could lead to their consumption of bleach that isn't washed off, which can damage the body because bleach is toxic. Eighteen percent used household cleaner on bare skin, which can damage the skin and cause rashes and burns," Hill said.
It sounds like we need better education.9 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »Interesting and informative article for everyone to read and pass on. Click the link below to read the full information.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/19/health/cdc-covid-guidelines-cleaning/index.html
"CDC determined that the risk of surface transmission is low, and secondary to the primary routes of virus transmission through direct contact droplets and aerosols," Vincent Hill, Chief of the Waterborne Disease Prevention Branch, said on a CDC-sponsored telephone briefing.
...Hill said the risk of transmission from touching a surface, while small, is elevated indoors. Outdoors, the sun and other factors can destroy viruses, Hill said.
Household cleaners pose a danger
...Hill cited CDC research from June of 2020 showing that, of those people surveyed, "only 58% knew that bleach should not be mixed with ammonia, because mixing bleach and ammonia creates a toxic gas that harms people's lungs."
"Nineteen percent wash food products with bleach, which could lead to their consumption of bleach that isn't washed off, which can damage the body because bleach is toxic. Eighteen percent used household cleaner on bare skin, which can damage the skin and cause rashes and burns," Hill said.
It sounds like we need better education.
Speaking of the need for better education, I made a new Covid education related topic here: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10830885/how-many-of-you-know-the-non-vaccinated-covid-hospitalization-rate-without-googling-it/p10 -
I just got my second Moderna shot. Definitely felt it going in this time; either because it was a different pharmacist or it was the chip going in.
15
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions