The Vaccine Discussion Thread

[goofystitch]

There are nearly 3,000 people dying in the US EVERY DAY. We can't just sweep that under a carpet and dream of a rose-colored vaccine bailing us out.

The vaccine is going to solve this problem next spring, but let's focus on the winter first.

There were 2,762 deaths yesterday but that has not been true every day. Look at the CDC website and the data. In the last 7 days, the deaths were 0.5 per 100,000 and since January 21, 2020 the deaths were 83 per 100,000.

 

[Intr3pid]

There were 2,762 deaths yesterday but that has not been true every day. Look at the CDC website and the data. In the last 7 days, the deaths were 0.5 per 100,000 and since January 21, 2020 the deaths were 83 per 100,000.

Are you really going to build your argument on 'nearly 3000' vs 2762 when the trend is upwards? Or that a rate is X per Y when nearly 3000 people are dying daily?

 

[brentm77]

I don't think the narrative has been pessimistic at all. If anything, those in the leadership have been dismissive, and the elections and the lawsuits are still dominating the news.

There are nearly 3,000 people dying in the US EVERY DAY. We can't just sweep that under a carpet and dream of a rose-colored vaccine bailing us out.

The vaccine is going to solve this problem next spring, but let's focus on the winter first.

There is nothing wrong with giving people hope and being optimistic. But, I am not looking for rose-colored opinions, as much as smarter messaging and more realistic goals of when we can return to "normal." Messaging that we may never return to normal will only result in less compliance now. And setting goals that aren't realistically attainable (in some reasonable time frame) will do the same.

The virus is dangerous and deadly to many, but lockdowns and extreme measures are devastating too, both in lives lost, emotional damage, and economic damage - which isn't only about money - economic damages costs lives, quality of life, and health. Experts need to understand that policy decisions must account for more than the effects of one virus. No policy decision should ever be made in a vacuum. There is always risk and compromise in well-thought-out policy. Always. Without exception. Experts sounds like they want nearly 100% elimination of risk before life continues, and that is neither realistic nor productive.

I know many here seem perfectly happy with the isolation. Or at least not too concerned about it. To each there own. But many are suffering severely for it, including children (and particularly socioeconomically disadvantaged children). We have had posts here of those in the travel industry whose careers are devastated and who can't pay their bills. Millions in the hospitality industry around the globe are paying the price for our safety. Hundreds of thousands aren't getting proper medical care due to the virus. We owe it to all of them to find a balance for when we can exit this situation and make the messaging clear on when that is likely to be, instead of always saying, "not so fast..."

 

[jane01jp]

Pfizer is now reporting that their vaccine may not keep you from being contagious. This means that immunity passes and the like are totally worthless and the rationale for getting the shots is radically reduced.

https://thehill.com/news-by-subject...-sure-if-someone-can-transmit-virus-after?amp

 

[goofystitch]

Are you really going to build your argument on 'nearly 3000' vs 2762 when the trend is upwards? Or that a rate is X per Y when nearly 3000 people are dying daily?

I am not building my argument on that specific number. A much greater number of people die every day from other illnesses. The collateral damage to these lockdowns needs to be addressed. Almost everyone recovers from this virus and I am just trying to add perspective.

 

[jane01jp]

At some point, it will be beyond absurd to say people who have been vaccinated cannot return to normal life. Assuming the vacine is widely available, people will have the choice to incur the risk of not getting it. For those who are high risk, but cannot, how is that different than other respiratory illnesses that are dangerous to high risk groups?

Is it me, or does it sometimes seem that a certain percentage of the media/experts would be thrilled if we would all agree to permanent isolation? Or at least thrive off of dismissing any hope people may have.

There has to be and end in sight, or people will eventually just give up and return to normal anyway. It's already happening. The experts would get more compliance now, by being more optimistic and realistic about the future. It's getting old.

The "end in sight" comes when we decide. Our rights did not come from our government. The government's role is to defend our rights, not to provide them.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

oh god not this again

 

[braysmommy]

oh god not this again

My thoughts exactly.

 

[jane01jp]

The Prizer chairman's comments about not being sure whether their vaccine confers herd immunity makes the strategy of "hunkering down" and waiting for the vaccine a fool's errand. None of the "immunity passes," proofs of vaccine, etc. would be of any use whatsoever. This guy's honesty is undercutting any rationale for taking the vaccine. Look for him to walk back his comments in 3, 2, 1 ...

 

[jane01jp]

Pfizer slashed its December vaccine shipment target in half due to supply chain issues. (Wall Street Journal)

 

[tidefan]

Pfizer is now reporting that their vaccine may not keep you from being contagious. This means that immunity passes and the like are totally worthless and the rationale for getting the shots is radically reduced.

https://thehill.com/news-by-subject...-sure-if-someone-can-transmit-virus-after?amp

I think that's a bit misleading. Essentially, he said that they didn't study that as it was not what the initial clinical trial was designed to test. Regardless, if the vaccine protects against severe disease only, that's still infinitely better than where we are now.

I did see that the DOD is rolling out "Vaccination kits with ID cards". I wouldn't be surprised for these to be required, at least for a year or two once things do start back up.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/02/health/covid-19-vaccination-kit-record-card/index.html

Lastly, I spoke with someone in healthcare here in Alabama who stated that the ADPH (Dept. of Public Health) has the initial numbers and locations of Pfizer vaccine ready to go (apparently, the state's 6 largest hospitals will have the cold storage capacity to store vaccine) as soon as FDA issues an EUA. They said, at least here, they would follow the CDC guidelines issued by ACIP earlier this week. Apparently, we will receive something like 40,000 doses on day 1, with supplies ramping up weekly (whatever that means). As a point of clarification, I mentioned to the person I spoke with that that would only allow 20,000 people to be vaccinated, however, they pointed out that no, 40,000 would be vaccinated that first week as they wouldn't be getting the next dosage until 21 days later. Not sure why I hadn't processed that in my head, but it makes perfect sense... Also, as an aside, they mentioned that providers are being enrolled into a vaccine distribution system now (though the public has not seen who these providers will be - I assume that will go out if and when an EUA is issued).

On a related note, they also mentioned that they were seeing very good results with the Eli Lilly Monoclonal Antibody, so don't forget about that line of treatment as well (though, apparently, this is most effective prior to one needing hospitalization...)

 

[jane01jp]

I think that's a bit misleading. Essentially, he said that they didn't study that as it was not what the initial clinical trial was designed to test. Regardless, if the vaccine protects against severe disease only, that's still infinitely better than where we are now.

I did see that the DOD is rolling out "Vaccination kits with ID cards". I wouldn't be surprised for these to be required, at least for a year or two once things do start back up.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/02/health/covid-19-vaccination-kit-record-card/index.html

Lastly, I spoke with someone in healthcare here in Alabama who stated that the ADPH (Dept. of Public Health) has the initial numbers and locations of Pfizer vaccine ready to go (apparently, the state's 6 largest hospitals will have the cold storage capacity to store vaccine) as soon as FDA issues an EUA. They said, at least here, they would follow the CDC guidelines issued by ACIP earlier this week. Apparently, we will receive something like 40,000 doses on day 1, with supplies ramping up weekly (whatever that means). As a point of clarification, I mentioned to the person I spoke with that that would only allow 20,000 people to be vaccinated, however, they pointed out that no, 40,000 would be vaccinated that first week as they wouldn't be getting the next dosage until 21 days later. Not sure why I hadn't processed that in my head, but it makes perfect sense... Also, as an aside, they mentioned that providers are being enrolled into a vaccine distribution system now (though the public has not seen who these providers will be - I assume that will go out if and when an EUA is issued).

On a related note, they also mentioned that they were seeing very good results with the Eli Lilly Monoclonal Antibody, so don't forget about that line of treatment as well (though, apparently, this is most effective prior to one needing hospitalization...)

"Regardless, if the vaccine protects against severe disease only, that's still infinitely better than where we are now. "

I suppose that for those in higher-risk categories, that might be the case. But, hardly compelling for 20 somethings to altruistically get the test to protect grandma, when no one knows whether that would work. Testing to establish efficacy against contagion should be part of what they do.

 

[gotomu212]

I am not building my argument on that specific number. A much greater number of people die every day from other illnesses. The collateral damage to these lockdowns needs to be addressed. Almost everyone recovers from this virus and I am just trying to add perspective.

Last week CoVid became the leading cause of death in the US surpassing heart disease deaths for the week. We don’t quite know what the impact of a mass winter surge is going to do to death rates of CoVid or other conditions if hospitals are overwhelmed. I think hanging our hats on “people die of other stuff and we dont take extraordinary measures” is not going to be applicable for this phase of the spread.

 

[tidefan]

"Regardless, if the vaccine protects against severe disease only, that's still infinitely better than where we are now. "

I suppose that for those in higher-risk categories, that might be the case. But, hardly compelling for 20 somethings to altruistically get the test to protect grandma, when no one knows whether that would work. Testing to establish efficacy against contagion should be part of what they do.

But this is a tricky thing to try to do. You could test people with vaccine to see if they have a COVID infection, but what the vaccine does is when the virus enters your body (i.e. - an infection), it primes your immune system to fight it off. So, you still, technically, I suppose, could "have" the infection. Other than a mass Stage IV observational study or a challenge trial where they took a bunch of vaccinated people and purposely tried to infect them, then put them in contact with a bunch of unvaccinated people, it would be difficult to gather this information.

 

[jane01jp]

Last week CoVid became the leading cause of death in the US surpassing heart disease deaths for the week. We don’t quite know what the impact of a mass winter surge is going to do to death rates of CoVid or other conditions if hospitals are overwhelmed. I think hanging our hats on “people die of other stuff and we dont take extraordinary measures” is not going to be applicable for this phase of the spread.

I haven't seen any recent stats on excess deaths. If deaths "from COVID" are similar to numbers from "deaths with COVID," we should be able to observe large numbers of excess deaths.

 

[jane01jp]

But this is a tricky thing to try to do. You could test people with vaccine to see if they have a COVID infection, but what the vaccine does is when the virus enters your body (i.e. - an infection), it primes your immune system to fight it off. So, you still, technically, I suppose, could "have" the infection. Other than a mass Stage IV observational study or a challenge trial where they took a bunch of vaccinated people and purposely tried to infect them, then put them in contact with a bunch of unvaccinated people, it would be difficult to gather this information.

Yeah. So, it will be hard to determine the role of the vaccine in eradicating the disease.

 

[tidefan]

Yeah. So, it will be hard to determine the role of the vaccine in eradicating the disease.

Correct, this is something, most likely, that they will know years down the road.

To the earlier point though, if we just focus on the effect to DCL, if DCL requires all passengers to have a Vaccine Card or in a Vaccine Registry, it would take a lot of the liability off of the cruise line and it would then be on the individual...

 

[jane01jp]

Interesting article on vaccine rollout:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/oth...-health-workers-while-cases-surge/ar-BB1bC0h8

 

[DisUniversal]

Interesting article on vaccine rollout:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/oth...-health-workers-while-cases-surge/ar-BB1bC0h8

A day or two off work for a small percentage of those who get the vaccine doesn't seem like that big an impact given the benefits.

 

[goofystitch]

Last week CoVid became the leading cause of death in the US surpassing heart disease deaths for the week. We don’t quite know what the impact of a mass winter surge is going to do to death rates of CoVid or other conditions if hospitals are overwhelmed. I think hanging our hats on “people die of other stuff and we dont take extraordinary measures” is not going to be applicable for this phase of the spread.

Where did you get that data because it is not true.