beaf12
Silver
Posts: 424 Likes: 2,056
|
Post by beaf12 on Jan 2, 2021 22:48:30 GMT -6
lemondrop Dh and I are both scheduled for our second doses and hopefully thereās no change in that. Great Britain is switching to one dose is better than nothing. They are delaying 2nd doses until 12 weeks (with no research that it will be effective), hoping the supply will be there for 2nd doses and saying if necessary mix and match the vaccines š³. Apparently 1 dose gives over 70% immunity and with the more virulent strain, they just want to vaccinate as many as possible. Thereās not research into how long 1 dose is effective. I see the rationale in vaccinating many more people, but worry itāll cause complications down the road. So many difficult decisions.
|
|
|
Post by lemondrop on Jan 2, 2021 22:51:41 GMT -6
lemondrop I heard about that idea but donāt remember from where. I know there is the train of thought of ābetter if everyone is at 50% safe vs less at 90%ā or whatever. Theyāre wrong, but ... yeah. My hospital and DHs hospital are NOT doing that. Weāre all already scheduled to get our second doses. They make you sign up basically right after you get the first one. Thank goodness. I know sheās already scheduled for the 2nd dose, too - she sent me a picture of her vaccination card and it gives the date sheās scheduled to get the second one. Iām hoping her hospital follows through with the proper vaccination protocol. I never anticipated that thought process, though.
|
|
|
Post by lemondrop on Jan 2, 2021 23:03:26 GMT -6
lemondrop Dh and I are both scheduled for our second doses and hopefully thereās no change in that. Great Britain is switching to one dose is better than nothing. They are delaying 2nd doses until 12 weeks (with no research that it will be effective), hoping the supply will be there for 2nd doses and saying if necessary mix and match the vaccines š³. Apparently 1 dose gives over 70% immunity and with the more virulent strain, they just want to vaccinate as many as possible. Thereās not research into how long 1 dose is effective. I see the rationale in vaccinating many more people, but worry itāll cause complications down the road. So many difficult decisions. Woooow. I hadnāt heard that about GB. Generally Pfizer is just over 50% effective with one dose, Moderna is around 80% - but Modernaās numbers are skewed by a few factors so most likely less than that. This will most definitely cause issues down the road, particularly because it simply hasnāt been tested in this manner. But if it seems like most people are getting a secondary dosage date... how the heck is it going to work when all of these people start showing up for the second dose? Theyāre going to have to call everyone and either push their dates back or cancel them outright. Yet another disaster on the 45 Administrationās hands for not getting this roll out done in a more reliable, educated manner.
|
|
athn64
Ruby
Posts: 17,412 Likes: 76,719
|
Post by athn64 on Jan 2, 2021 23:08:07 GMT -6
Both my brother and my dad are both scheduled for their second dose next week. I can't understand not administering the vaccine appropriately.
|
|
beaf12
Silver
Posts: 424 Likes: 2,056
|
Post by beaf12 on Jan 2, 2021 23:43:37 GMT -6
lemondrop Dh and I are both scheduled for our second doses and hopefully thereās no change in that. Great Britain is switching to one dose is better than nothing. They are delaying 2nd doses until 12 weeks (with no research that it will be effective), hoping the supply will be there for 2nd doses and saying if necessary mix and match the vaccines š³. Apparently 1 dose gives over 70% immunity and with the more virulent strain, they just want to vaccinate as many as possible. Thereās not research into how long 1 dose is effective. I see the rationale in vaccinating many more people, but worry itāll cause complications down the road. So many difficult decisions. Woooow. I hadnāt heard that about GB. Generally Pfizer is just over 50% effective with one dose, Moderna is around 80% - but Modernaās numbers are skewed by a few factors so most likely less than that. This will most definitely cause issues down the road, particularly because it simply hasnāt been tested in this manner. But if it seems like most people are getting a secondary dosage date... how the heck is it going to work when all of these people start showing up for the second dose? Theyāre going to have to call everyone and either push their dates back or cancel them outright. Yet another disaster on the 45 Administrationās hands for not getting this roll out done in a more reliable, educated manner. The US has not modified its vaccine administration plan yet, just UK. So here people should still get their second dose at the appropriate time.
|
|
|
Post by oreobitsy on Jan 3, 2021 0:38:23 GMT -6
Is the UK difference because of the prevalence of the new strain?
ETA: never mind, yes I see that is the reason. I feel so deeply for the those that hold the weight of decision-making during the pandemic. It must be so difficult to try to rationalize actions with statistics right now.
|
|
cp3
Opal
Posts: 7,895 Likes: 34,435
|
Post by cp3 on Jan 3, 2021 1:52:50 GMT -6
My cousin that does behavioral therapy for a prison got hers today and has her second dose scheduled. My mom got hers on Christmas Eve so I'm going to ask her tomorrow if she has her second one scheduled.
I feel like it defeats the purpose of vaccinating people now if they aren't going to get the second dose and won't be as immune. And then would they need another two vaccines later? It just seems like we need to follow the protocol for these vaccines so we can get as many people as possible fully vaccinated versus more people with minimal immunity.
|
|
|
Post by crimsonandclover on Jan 3, 2021 2:45:20 GMT -6
lemondrop Dh and I are both scheduled for our second doses and hopefully thereās no change in that. Great Britain is switching to one dose is better than nothing. They are delaying 2nd doses until 12 weeks (with no research that it will be effective), hoping the supply will be there for 2nd doses and saying if necessary mix and match the vaccines š³. Apparently 1 dose gives over 70% immunity and with the more virulent strain, they just want to vaccinate as many as possible. Thereās not research into how long 1 dose is effective. I see the rationale in vaccinating many more people, but worry itāll cause complications down the road. So many difficult decisions. Woooow. I hadnāt heard that about GB. Generally Pfizer is just over 50% effective with one dose, Moderna is around 80% - but Modernaās numbers are skewed by a few factors so most likely less than that. This will most definitely cause issues down the road, particularly because it simply hasnāt been tested in this manner. But if it seems like most people are getting a secondary dosage date... how the heck is it going to work when all of these people start showing up for the second dose? Theyāre going to have to call everyone and either push their dates back or cancel them outright. Yet another disaster on the 45 Administrationās hands for not getting this roll out done in a more reliable, educated manner. Germany is also considering switching to one dose until enough vaccine is available. It's a really complex ethical problem- I think most are in agreement that the most vulnerable in group 1 should get both doses for the most protection. But especially as you get into the later groups, if they get both doses then you're denying other people who could also have severe or long-haul cases the vaccine based on probability. Young, healthy people also get severe cases, and they also die (less frequently, but there are plenty of cases), and yet they will be denied access to the vaccine for another 6 months or so. So if you give everyone (starting in group 2) just the first dose, then you're reducing everyone's risk of getting it and reducing the risk of having a severe case if you do get it, and allowing double the number of people access to that reduced risk. It's really not as cut and dry as "of course everyone who gets the first dose must get the second" because as long as there isn't enough vaccine, you're denying it to some people who will inevitably get Covid and have severe, long-term effects just because they don't fit the criteria for the priority groups. I'm not saying they should definitely do it, I'm just saying that I do understand the logic behind the decision, if it's made, and I think it's ethically justifiable.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2021 2:47:30 GMT -6
My cousin that does behavioral therapy for a prison got hers today and has her second dose scheduled. My mom got hers on Christmas Eve so I'm going to ask her tomorrow if she has her second one scheduled. I feel like it defeats the purpose of vaccinating people now if they aren't going to get the second dose and won't be as immune. And then would they need another two vaccines later? It just seems like we need to follow the protocol for these vaccines so we can get as many people as possible fully vaccinated versus more people with minimal immunity. And we *really* donāt need any more confusion surrounding the pandemic. I know itās inevitable right now as we still donāt have any clear federal leadership š but uggghhh can the folks in charge please please please not send the public more mixed messages!? š©
|
|
|
Post by blurnette989 on Jan 3, 2021 2:54:48 GMT -6
My cousin that does behavioral therapy for a prison got hers today and has her second dose scheduled. My mom got hers on Christmas Eve so I'm going to ask her tomorrow if she has her second one scheduled. I feel like it defeats the purpose of vaccinating people now if they aren't going to get the second dose and won't be as immune. And then would they need another two vaccines later? It just seems like we need to follow the protocol for these vaccines so we can get as many people as possible fully vaccinated versus more people with minimal immunity. It depends on what your purpose is- is the purpose to provide some immunity to as many people as possible as quickly as possible to prevent a third wave? Partial immunity RightNow will likely save more lives in the short term than fully vaccinating half as many. Longer term yes this is absolutely a gamble- but the UK has also received tens of millions fewer vaccines than expected originally by this timeand are having to pivot. I'm certain is was not an easy decision and i can understand lots of people not being happy about it. But it's not a completely unfounded idea. Eta or what crimsonandclover said!
|
|
|
Post by lemondrop on Jan 3, 2021 7:09:46 GMT -6
My cousin that does behavioral therapy for a prison got hers today and has her second dose scheduled. My mom got hers on Christmas Eve so I'm going to ask her tomorrow if she has her second one scheduled. I feel like it defeats the purpose of vaccinating people now if they aren't going to get the second dose and won't be as immune. And then would they need another two vaccines later? It just seems like we need to follow the protocol for these vaccines so we can get as many people as possible fully vaccinated versus more people with minimal immunity. It depends on what your purpose is- is the purpose to provide some immunity to as many people as possible as quickly as possible to prevent a third wave? Partial immunity RightNow will likely save more lives in the short term than fully vaccinating half as many. Longer term yes this is absolutely a gamble- but the UK has also received tens of millions fewer vaccines than expected originally by this timeand are having to pivot. I'm certain is was not an easy decision and i can understand lots of people not being happy about it. But it's not a completely unfounded idea. Eta or what crimsonandclover said! Itās not unfounded, but it can also create a vaccine resistant strain of the virus by partially vaccinating. We already donāt know long term efficacy simply because we donāt have that historical data. This is an already dangerous game.
|
|
byjove
Ruby
Posts: 15,191 Likes: 74,077
|
Post by byjove on Jan 3, 2021 7:24:27 GMT -6
Sounds like we are playing with fire
|
|
|
Post by blurnette989 on Jan 3, 2021 8:42:08 GMT -6
It depends on what your purpose is- is the purpose to provide some immunity to as many people as possible as quickly as possible to prevent a third wave? Partial immunity RightNow will likely save more lives in the short term than fully vaccinating half as many. Longer term yes this is absolutely a gamble- but the UK has also received tens of millions fewer vaccines than expected originally by this timeand are having to pivot. I'm certain is was not an easy decision and i can understand lots of people not being happy about it. But it's not a completely unfounded idea. Eta or what crimsonandclover said! Itās not unfounded, but it can also create a vaccine resistant strain of the virus by partially vaccinating. We already donāt know long term efficacy simply because we donāt have that historical data. This is an already dangerous game. I do agree it is risky.
|
|
addymac
Emerald
Posts: 12,676 Likes: 54,007
|
Post by addymac on Jan 3, 2021 8:49:06 GMT -6
I want to scream. I understand the new strain is causing a freak out but modifying the vaccine dosing is NOT the way to go. Itās not going to work and then anti vax people are gonna go hog wild with it not working and then more people are going to die.
Obviously I get the idea behind one dose for more vs two for some but I just donāt know.
Fuck man.
|
|
richard
Emerald
Posts: 13,699 Likes: 128,724
|
Post by richard on Jan 3, 2021 9:03:10 GMT -6
lemondrop Dh and I are both scheduled for our second doses and hopefully thereās no change in that. Great Britain is switching to one dose is better than nothing. They are delaying 2nd doses until 12 weeks (with no research that it will be effective), hoping the supply will be there for 2nd doses and saying if necessary mix and match the vaccines š³. Apparently 1 dose gives over 70% immunity and with the more virulent strain, they just want to vaccinate as many as possible. Thereās not research into how long 1 dose is effective. I see the rationale in vaccinating many more people, but worry itāll cause complications down the road. So many difficult decisions. Yes, Iāve only heard about this in the UK. ETA: I see this has been covered!
|
|
Minerva
Ruby
Posts: 15,381 Likes: 67,036
|
Post by Minerva on Jan 3, 2021 9:31:15 GMT -6
Woooow. I hadnāt heard that about GB. Generally Pfizer is just over 50% effective with one dose, Moderna is around 80% - but Modernaās numbers are skewed by a few factors so most likely less than that. This will most definitely cause issues down the road, particularly because it simply hasnāt been tested in this manner. But if it seems like most people are getting a secondary dosage date... how the heck is it going to work when all of these people start showing up for the second dose? Theyāre going to have to call everyone and either push their dates back or cancel them outright. Yet another disaster on the 45 Administrationās hands for not getting this roll out done in a more reliable, educated manner. Germany is also considering switching to one dose until enough vaccine is available. It's a really complex ethical problem- I think most are in agreement that the most vulnerable in group 1 should get both doses for the most protection. But especially as you get into the later groups, if they get both doses then you're denying other people who could also have severe or long-haul cases the vaccine based on probability. Young, healthy people also get severe cases, and they also die (less frequently, but there are plenty of cases), and yet they will be denied access to the vaccine for another 6 months or so. So if you give everyone (starting in group 2) just the first dose, then you're reducing everyone's risk of getting it and reducing the risk of having a severe case if you do get it, and allowing double the number of people access to that reduced risk. It's really not as cut and dry as "of course everyone who gets the first dose must get the second" because as long as there isn't enough vaccine, you're denying it to some people who will inevitably get Covid and have severe, long-term effects just because they don't fit the criteria for the priority groups. I'm not saying they should definitely do it, I'm just saying that I do understand the logic behind the decision, if it's made, and I think it's ethically justifiable. When you consider the fact that the increased transmission of the new strain has an exponential effect on both infections and mortality, then one dose to more people as fast as possible starts making a lot of sense from a straight numbers POV. But the logistics of changing course now or trying to provide tier 1 individuals two doses and the general pop just a single dose seems like a nightmare. Especially since we donāt have the infrastructure in place to efficiently deliver the vaccine to the masses at all yet.
|
|
dc2london
Admin
Press Secretary
Posts: 61,576 Likes: 418,993
|
Post by dc2london on Jan 3, 2021 9:43:36 GMT -6
Dr Fauci was just asked about giving everyone one dose and his eyes just about rolled out of his head. He said that that's a solution for a problem we have. ETA: a solution to a problem we DON'T have
|
|
|
Post by goldenlove on Jan 3, 2021 9:48:40 GMT -6
Just came across this that fits this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by crimsonandclover on Jan 3, 2021 9:55:56 GMT -6
Just came across this that fits this discussion. Ok, for the moment that has convinced me. No delaying 2nd dose. Again, in Germany so far this is just a theoretical suggestion. Everyone who gets the 1st dose automatically has a second (already delivered and available) dose reserved for them.
|
|
|
Post by ldubhawksfan on Jan 3, 2021 10:09:51 GMT -6
Woooow. I hadnāt heard that about GB. Generally Pfizer is just over 50% effective with one dose, Moderna is around 80% - but Modernaās numbers are skewed by a few factors so most likely less than that. This will most definitely cause issues down the road, particularly because it simply hasnāt been tested in this manner. But if it seems like most people are getting a secondary dosage date... how the heck is it going to work when all of these people start showing up for the second dose? Theyāre going to have to call everyone and either push their dates back or cancel them outright. Yet another disaster on the 45 Administrationās hands for not getting this roll out done in a more reliable, educated manner. The US has not modified its vaccine administration plan yet, just UK. So here people should still get their second dose at the appropriate time. Fauci is very much like we are advising based on science and there is no science on waiting 12 weeks for the second dose.
|
|
Diordra
Sapphire
Posts: 4,368 Likes: 18,191
|
Post by Diordra on Jan 3, 2021 10:12:49 GMT -6
Nate Silver has had several threads on Twitter the last few days about delaying the second dose.
|
|
addymac
Emerald
Posts: 12,676 Likes: 54,007
|
Post by addymac on Jan 3, 2021 10:23:32 GMT -6
Dr Fauci was just asked about giving everyone one dose and his eyes just about rolled out of his head. He said that that's a solution for a problem we have. Wait what?
|
|
dc2london
Admin
Press Secretary
Posts: 61,576 Likes: 418,993
|
Post by dc2london on Jan 3, 2021 10:27:14 GMT -6
Dr Fauci was just asked about giving everyone one dose and his eyes just about rolled out of his head. He said that that's a solution for a problem we have. Wait what? Sorry, a problem we DON'T have. I suck at typing on my tablet.
|
|
Minerva
Ruby
Posts: 15,381 Likes: 67,036
|
Post by Minerva on Jan 3, 2021 10:33:41 GMT -6
A couple of points: 1) It seems like there is some confusion between the way antibiotic resistance develops (incomplete treatment of bacteria in a host, allowing some mutant bacteria to survive and replicate after the antibiotic is stopped) versus viral vaccines and how they affect mutation. Vaccines, even less effective ones (think flu vaccines), help your body develop the tools to fight off the virus itself. Even if you still get sick from a virus after a vaccine, your body is more equipped to fully fight it off quickly and less likely to spread it to others. Once again, like flu vaccines. And mutations are random and occur at a steady, low rate each time the virus reproces. A partially-immunized person is less likely to produce new mutations that spread to others because there is less viral reproduction in their body and they will likely have a lower viral load and be less contagious. The major threat that people are referring to in increased selection pressure is viruses mutating into new strains in immunosuppressed people who are given monoclonal antibodies. But this happens in the absence of vaccines as well.
2) The mRNA vaccines target the spike protein that the virus uses to enter cells. They cause the body to create a variety of antibodies targeting different parts of the spike protein that are much more comprehensive and effective than the monoclonal antibodies given in transfusions. Functional mutations would have to preserve the ability of the spike protein to allow the virus to enter cells. Remember, mutations themselves are random and occur at a relatively steady rate. Functional mutations that allow the virus to spread through natural selection in a vaccinated population will not be very common.
Increased transmission is the biggest threat leading to increased viral mutation. Each transmission event is an increased chance for the virus to mutate and for mutant strains with selective advantage to increase in frequency in the host population. The higher the transmission, the faster natural selection can occur. And the more likely that an immunosuppressed person will be infected, allowing the virus an ideal vessel to produce new mutant strain with even higher lethality or transmission. š
From an evolutionary standpoint, the higher transmission rate of the new strain of COVID is a HUGE mutation concern, in addition to being a huge concern because of related higher rates of mortality and morbidity. There isnāt an easy answer to this problem. I tend to think we should continue pushing on with the two doses because it is what has been tested
Some interesting threads on the topic providing and linking to a variety of perspectives:
|
|
addymac
Emerald
Posts: 12,676 Likes: 54,007
|
Post by addymac on Jan 3, 2021 10:35:35 GMT -6
Sorry, a problem we DON'T have. I suck at typing on my tablet. I just got so confused and also worried. Haha.
|
|
AmyG
Ruby
Posts: 15,325 Likes: 33,879
|
Post by AmyG on Jan 3, 2021 10:47:34 GMT -6
The worry is the current rate of infection gives us x rate of death. (.o4 or less) linear growth. At least Until hospitals becoms overwhelmed then failure to provide care means exponential growth kicks in. 50% higher death rate would mean instead of 1000 deaths a day, 1500 deaths a day.
But more transmittable by 50% means every person doesnt give it to <1 person, they give it to about 2 people. Rounding cause you cant give it to a half a person. They estimate that viral load is increased within each person, where our things we do to prevent spread are less able to work, social distancing, 15 minute or less contact, not that much viral load on surfaces.
If 1 person gives to 2 people, 2 give to 4 the expenential growth rate becomes number of cases uncountable quickly.
More cases more easily spreading to others means more people overwhelming hospitals.
More easily spread also means schools less likely to open. Some early evidence was it might make kids sicker than regular covid but not sure since they dont have a lot of data.
If more people have some immunity they may still catch this but have less serious cases req medical care.
Its certainly a pickle.
|
|
richard
Emerald
Posts: 13,699 Likes: 128,724
|
Post by richard on Jan 3, 2021 10:52:06 GMT -6
I do not have confidence in the efficiencies of general vaccine distribution already and not being able to sign people up for their second dose when theyāre getting a first is a huge concern to me.
Like phone lines and websites are crashing, people are lining up overnight in the few places that have started general rollout. Sending people out the door after their first shot with a āweāll be in touchā seems like a recipe for disaster.
Iām talking about the US specifically here.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,214 Likes: 219,423
Member is Online
|
Post by jaygee on Jan 3, 2021 11:05:40 GMT -6
Dr Fauci was just asked about giving everyone one dose and his eyes just about rolled out of his head. He said that that's a solution for a problem we have. ETA: a solution to a problem we DON'T have This. His answer was perfect and needs to be on loop. It was on MTP. It is absolutely a solution to a problem that we donāt have right now. Our issue is not amount of vaccine. Itās distribution and administration. Although I really think in a couple of weeks we should be fine on both of those as well.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,214 Likes: 219,423
Member is Online
|
Post by jaygee on Jan 3, 2021 11:16:23 GMT -6
Hi, Iām back with strong opinions. Iām a hard no on delaying the second dose here in the US. I donāt think itās the right move. We need to follow what the clinical trials tested and showed effective. We need people fully vaccinated. My health systemās first round of second doses are scheduled for 1/6 (this is Pfizer only we havenāt administered Moderna yet) so in two weeks we will have thousands fully vaccinated up to the 95% effective rate. Thatās astounding and what we need.
The problems Iām seeing is with fighting over who gets it first that is slowing down the administration. Also, the federal government is saying numbers are coming that are not actually showing up which makes it difficult to plan administration. And the last issue is just plan resources. States and counties need money to pay for people to administer the shots (aka already overworked healthcare workers) and spaces to do so. You need big open spaces so that people donāt get covid while they are getting the shot. They need to queue up safely and then wait the 15 minutes to watch for a reaction and then have someone schedule the second shot right there. Itās a big operation. We should have been planning for it. But unfortunately itās falling to the same health departments that are already overworked with contact tracing and battling the pandemic. We need to activate the military to conduct a widespread administration operation imo.
|
|
jaygee
Diamond
Posts: 28,214 Likes: 219,423
Member is Online
|
Post by jaygee on Jan 3, 2021 11:17:38 GMT -6
The theory that the new strain is making kids sicker has been debunked.
|
|