COVID-19 vaccination poll

[Hyacinth]

My first poll. 🙂

Edited August 13, 2020 by Hyacinth

[PrincessMommy]

I have kids involved in various levels of research.  All of them say they would never be on the first round of vaccines (One used to work in first-round human drug testing).  They know what can go wrong.   

I take their first-hand knowledge and won't go first.  I am eager for a vaccine, I just don't want to be a guinea pig.   

I suspect that the military will be our first guinea pigs though.  

[Laura Corin]

I was among the first children to get the measles vaccine in the UK.  I have already signed up to be contacted for possible vaccine trials: I'm not a carer for anyone else and I'm happy to help.

[kokotg]

My point of view on this has shifted the longer things drag on. I still won't be first in line, but I'm very anxious for a vaccine. And my husband likely WILL be first in line (whenever he can be, anyway) if he's back teaching in a classroom with students by then. (if the vaccine magically appears before November 3, however, I will be considerably more skeptical).

[medawyn]

My BIL is head of one of the labs in testing stages for a possible vaccine.  We will rely heavily on his expertise once things come in the market.

[Syllieann]

I'll wait a good long time for myself and probably several years for my kids.  I hope the high risk people in my life get it ASAP so we can resume normal contact.

I saw an opinion piece saying that minorities should get it first because they have higher rates of infection and I was thinking to myself that a policy like that would go over like a lead balloon.  I can't even imagine the conspiracy theories that would develop.

[Carrie12345]

At the very beginning, I was on the “first in line” bench. Right now, I’m not up to date on the whole development process, so I’m less eager. But still eager. If that makes any sense.

[maize]

I'm somewhere between the first and second choices. No-one in my family has had a serious vaccine reaction and my personal vaccine record is longer than most (I moved all over the world as a kid and then joined the military as an adult...) I'm eager for a vaccine and will happily get in line as long as I can see a reasonable study record suggesting safety--maybe not among the first batch, but I suspect I wouldn't be high enough priority for that anyway. I'd accept a month of public vaccination without red flags as good enough, given the serious risks of contracting covid itself.

[catz]

I am kind of between 1 and 2.  As someone who turned 50 this year and who is beyond child rearing but is aging up to the place where I am more likely to have issues with covid and have some family history.  My father died of heart disease that originated with a virus, so I have little patience with the "but the death rate is so low, just get it and move on" crowd.  , I would get vaxed early.   IF phase 3 trials look very good and scientists are in favor.  Like some of the same scientists are concerned about the vax now being used in Russia.  I won't be politically bullied into something that isn't looked at as safe.  I am reading and following the science very closely.

For my teen/young adult?  I could see riding out longer for them.  Though I suspect that's how it will be rolled out anyway.  Kids tested and receive last.  I hope my mom and FIL are very first in line.   

We are fully vaxed here.  Some teen vaccinations have been slightly delayed for various reasons.  

[Pen]

 

Depends which vaccine.  The first done seems to be the Russian one? Sputnik V? Is that the one you mean?

 

[marbel]

I selected I'd be the first in line, but actually I probably won't rush out to get it. But if there were opportunities to participate in a trial I would do that.  So, I am not hesitant to be a guinea pig but inertia being what it is, when it's available I am  unlikely to be the first to make an appointment for it. 

[Pawz4me]

I chose the second option (eager but will wait and see a bit).

I suspect that most of us will get to wait and see, whether we want to or not, due to the time it will take to manufacture enough vaccine, and the way it will be rolled out/who will be given priority.

Our boys are 21 and 24 and probably won't/have no real need to be in a hurry to get it. DH and I have health issues, so the most important thing will be our doctors' advice.

And I'm assuming you mean a vaccine that's at least been reasonably well tested, not the Russian one.

[teachermom2834]

I have been thinking about this for my family. I expect my young adult men (who would make their own decisions apart from me anyway) to need it for jobs/college etc. and we have always vaxxed so I don't think they will hesitate much.

I think dh and I will be ready to get it not right away, but fairly early in the process. I think risks for us of Covid (at our ages and conditions) probably outweigh the vax risks.

I don't see giving it to my tween daughter anytime soon. She has too much physical and mental development yet to go and for her the vaccine risks probably outweight the Covid risk.

We do most vaccinations and have only declined or delayed a few over the years. We even get yearly flu shots. But a new vaccine on a a kid for a disease she would probably weather well is just a different story. 

[rebcoola]

DH will probably end up getting the first round cause of work.  The rest of us will probably be round two.  

[TCB]

32 minutes ago, medawyn said:

My BIL is head of one of the labs in testing stages for a possible vaccine.  We will rely heavily on his expertise once things come in the market.

Well please tell us too lol!

[EmseB]

I don't know what is considered by waiting, but by the time it's available to the general public, tens of thousands will have had it in Phase III trials, so I don't plan on waiting longer than that.

[TCB]

I voted other as I’m sure we will have to have it for work.

[Wheres Toto]

Option 2 depending on which vaccine it is.  I'm not completely comfortable with the way some vaccines are being given extra funding in the US.  It doesn't seem to be based on likelihood of being the best bet, but more on personal favors and politics.  

[mumto2]

I picked 2 in part because I really don’t think my family will have easy access in stage 1.  While over 50 Dh and I are in semi retirement and my kids have already elected online classes.  

What fascinates me is that the rate in other surveys in the news put the “plans to vaccinate” at essentially the same rate as the flu vaccine....someplace in the 40’s.  I do plan to vaccinate for CV just like I get my flu shot.  

[ktgrok]

I will jump at the chance. I miss my mom SO much, but she's very high risk. If she gets the vaccine, and I get the vaccine, we'd be able to see each other. For us, the risk of the vaccine is worth the benefit - interaction with family. 

 

[Guest]

I picked the first choice but I am really somewhat between the first two. I heard this weekend about a vaccine trial at University of Maryland Medical Center looking for vaccines. I have given it serious consideration. I am not against it. So I guess that would literally make me "first in line." But I do have a small reservation about being first in line, so maybe 75% first category, 25% second. 

[BeachGal]

I’m watching Oxford’s Chadox vaccine which was originally developed for SARS 1 and MERS. It’s been around awhile and should be safe. It might need a booster.

I’d be okay with Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson, too. I’d have to look more carefully at responses.

Moderna is interesting, too.

Vaccine development has made some big strides in the past 5-10 years. I’m following virologists and other scientists and their observations have been fairly optimistic.

[frogger]

I picked the second choice. I do think it is safer to wait but I feel like if it helped my kids get back to life I'd take the risk anyway but  I doubt I will be slated to be allowed to have it for awhile anyway though I'm semi-high risk with asthma but I only have the one risk factor and am not in a field with high contact either. I'd probably allow others (medical workers, school teachers etc) to get it first anyway. So I'd be pushed back into my comfort zone regardless.

[BeachGal]

Also, the first to get the vaccine will  likely be health care workers, elderly, some groups of children, teachers and military. There might be a few more groups as well. Can’t remember.

One of the big problems will be having enough needles and other supplies. A nasal vaccine could help, though.

Edited August 13, 2020 by BeachGal

[mathnerd]

First of all, I would like to see if the vaccine is effective before even considering it. I am also the kind of person who gets the flu after taking the flu vaccine and hence stopped taking the flu vaccine altogether. I was told long ago that there has to be booster shots every few months, though I am not up to date on vaccine information these days. I am not happy with the fast tracking talk going on and I have no wish to be a human guinea pig, so, I will wait, watch and decide.

[Farrar]

I chose the first option, but that was knowing that it won't be available to anyone until it's gone through clinical trials and it won't be an option for me until groups much more vulnerable have had a chance to get it.

[Katy]

I voted first in line, but NOT for the stupid Russian one.

Also, I had a bad reaction to a flu vaccine once, so I can't get another one.  If it says someone like me can't get it I won't.

[ktgrok]

Good point that it may be only for the elderly, health care workers, etc at first. 

in that case we'd have to see how effective it is - if very effective we could hopefully still visit my mom and dad, if they are vaccinated, even if we are not. I'd feel better about it though if we were vaccinated too. 

[TravelingChris]

I put two but really it is between 1 and 2,  I am high risk and older but not elderly.  I will be following my doctors' advice- so far, on 2 of 2 occasions, I had my primary care and my rheumatologist in agreement about course of action. They probably will also be in regards to the vaccine.  The one I was supposed to wait for 6 months was Shingrix and I did as did dh but we did get that vaccine completed.  OTOH, Covid complications are much more serious than shingles so I am not yet sure on what they will be telling me.  I also know that I am not really sure what the protocol for vaccination will be.  I know that at least youngest and I plus dh got H1N1 flu vaccine when there were shortages because two of us were high risk and dh was active duty military then.

[JennyD]

Here is my arm!  Give me the vaccine!  Hallelujah!

Ahem.  I voted #1.  However, as with others on this thread, by the time my family is able to get vaccinated a whole lot of other people will have already gotten it, so realistically my scenario will be #2.

I have been following vaccine developments closely and am excited about some of the possibilities out there.  I always knew in the abstract that vaccines were an amazing invention, but i really didn't fully appreciate the science behind them.  I am also hopeful that beyond vaccines and treatments for this particular virus, we'll come out of this pandemic with a lot of new knowledge and ideas about how to deal with other viruses, too.  

 

Edited August 13, 2020 by JennyD

[PeterPan]

Glad I'm not alone in my answer. That's all.

[mlktwins]

We will be waiting to see how others respond to it, but I don't think would be anywhere near first in line for a vaccine.  Those will go to front line workers.

[ktgrok]

I should add that normally I'm not a fan of new, unstudied vaccines. But I'm even less a fan of new, unstudied diseases! So if it is a choice between the two, and it looks like the hospitalization rate for the disease is significantly higher than for the vaccine, I'll get the vaccine. 

[Ali in OR]

I voted first in line, but also realize I'm not high priority enough. Let the frontline workers and those at highest risk go first, but I'll be in line after them!

[SKL]

I chose Other.  My answer would be:  I would handle it the same as the flu vaccine.  I do not get it, but maybe I will someday when I feel the health risks are great enough that I am unwilling to risk getting the flu.

If it were mandated - God forbid - I would really not want to get it, but I am not sure exactly how I would handle it.  I mean what would they do to me if I said no?  That would affect my decision.  I don't plan on committing self-immolation over a vaccine, but would I simply ignore the "mandate" as long as I could?  Probably.  Most likely there would be a movement against any mandate and it would be reversed, as happened with the HPV shot in some places.

[SKL]

I should add - I would still rather catch the bug and get immunity that way.  If there is a vax for people at higher risk, then I would be even more eager to catch the virus (along with my kids), while hopefully the risk to "at risk people" of my steps toward immunity would be reduced.

I have hopes of an effective, safe vax for everyone who doesn't want to catch the virus and get immune that way.  But it would be nice to have a choice.

[kbutton]

6 hours ago, PrincessMommy said:

I have kids involved in various levels of research.  All of them say they would never be on the first round of vaccines (One used to work in first-round human drug testing).  They know what can go wrong.   

I take their first-hand knowledge and won't go first.  I am eager for a vaccine, I just don't want to be a guinea pig.   

I suspect that the military will be our first guinea pigs though.  

This is where I am at. There were some coronavirus vaccines in the works before now that were de-prioritized in funding, so I don't feel like it's entirely a rush job. 

5 hours ago, Pawz4me said:

I chose the second option (eager but will wait and see a bit).

I suspect that most of us will get to wait and see, whether we want to or not, due to the time it will take to manufacture enough vaccine, and the way it will be rolled out/who will be given priority.

And I'm assuming you mean a vaccine that's at least been reasonably well tested, not the Russian one.

Yes and Yes.

DH is in healthcare, so he's likely to be a guinea pig. However, given that I thought we'd be having more abundant PPE by now (including better solutions for people who don't have foolproof fit tests in ANY N95 masks!!!), and healthcare workers/necessary workers aren't being tested routinely yet, I won't be holding my breath that they'll do a great job prioritizing who gets a vaccine.

[ktgrok]

6 minutes ago, kbutton said:

 

 However, given that I thought we'd be having more abundant PPE by now (including better solutions for people who don't have foolproof fit tests in ANY N95 masks!!!), and healthcare workers/necessary workers aren't being tested routinely yet, I won't be holding my breath that they'll do a great job prioritizing who gets a vaccine.

Yeah, at this rate the priority will be major league sports players 😞

[Lady Florida.]

I was in the first group of children in the U.S. to get the oral polio vaccine (the sugar cube one). They gave it to us in school - I was in 1st grade. I'll be in among the first in line to get the Covid vaccine once it comes on the market. My age might put me near the front of the line but it's more likely that I'll have to wait a bit. I expect certain front line workers would be first, at least I hope they would.

[hopeallgoeswell]

It depends on how it was tested (Was there an inert placebo as the control in all phases?  Were all adverse effects measured and for a period of more than a few days?) , whether or not it confers an inability to transmit the virus to others (Does it prevent me spreading it to others, protect just me from getting the virus, or just protect me from getting a severe case of the virus?), and how effective it is at creating a meaningful immune response (Was there a measure other than antibodies tested?).  Also, I want a vaccine that isn't liability-free since all are being hyper-fast tracked/skipping important testing phases and some of the companies are using never-before-used technology.

[BeachGal]

5 hours ago, JennyD said:

Here is my arm!  Give me the vaccine!  Hallelujah!

Ahem.  I voted #1.  However, as with others on this thread, by the time my family is able to get vaccinated a whole lot of other people will have already gotten it, so realistically my scenario will be #2.

I have been following vaccine developments closely and am excited about some of the possibilities out there.  I always knew in the abstract that vaccines were an amazing invention, but i really didn't fully appreciate the science behind them.  I am also hopeful that beyond vaccines and treatments for this particular virus, we'll come out of this pandemic with a lot of new knowledge and ideas about how to deal with other viruses, too.  

 

I am of the opinion that SCIENTISTS should be pictured on cereal boxes and not sports stars. What scientists need to know and the hurdles they’re forced to jump, they’re just not admired enough. We need to campaign more for them.
 

[Shoeless]

I picked other.  My sister and aunt are immunologists. I will get the vaccine when they say the data is good. I don't expect to be in the first round of vaccines, however. DH is high risk, so he may be offered it before I am. 

Edited August 14, 2020 by MissLemon

[EmseB]

For those of you using the term guinea pig, are you talking about enrolling in a clinical trial to test the safety?

Because I feel like there is some confusion about being the first one in line after trials are done and literally being a test subject.

Once it gets rolled out to the public, whomever is in line first won't be the guinea pigs because at that point tens of thousands of people will have already gotten the vax and provided the safety and efficacy data needed to roll it out to the public.

At least, this is my understanding. The issue with the Russian vax is that they are skipping the Phase III part and/or doing it concurrently with roll out which is a very bad idea.

[sassenach]

My answer is different for each person in my family. My blanket answer is I'd love to wait a few years and see how others do with it, but I'm not sure we'll have that option.

DS is super high risk so he'll be among the first to get it. He has more to lose by not getting it and I will want him to get it early (but maybe not too early).

I work in healthcare so my guess is I won't have a choice. If I did have a choice, I probably wouldn't wait too long just because of my exposure.

The rest of my family, I'd really like to wait. Again, with college bound kids, I'm not sure how long we'll have, but I don't want them to rush into it if we can help it. In my mind, my 2 healthy teens have the most to lose from a bad vaccine and the least risk of Covid. They're the ones I'm most hesitant about.

[Garga]

I’m mostly the second choice and a little bit the first. 

I happened to hear an interview on NPR today with a person who is working on a hopeful vaccine right now. 

The host asked him something about, “People are afraid this is being created too quickly and won’t be safe. Talk about that.” 

He explained that in order to speed up making the vaccine without cutting safety corners, that they can do phases of the vaccine simultaneously, whereas normally they might do them one at a time. He said that normally there is a lot of time waiting for review and approval, but since Covid is the number one priority right now, that wait time is much faster—any covid related thing is at the top of the list to be reviewed.  He said that right now, companies are making the vaccine he’s still working on, so that IF his vaccine works, there will already be millions of doses available, so there won’t be a wait of a few months for doses to be made.

He did say that they can only test about 30,000 people now (20,000 with the vaccine and 10,000 control people) and so they will probably not know the more rare side effects—those would only be discovered when the vaccine is already approved and rolled out.  They would just know the common side effects and not the rare ones.

 

So...part of me was reassured that they could make this vaccine faster than others, because they can double up the phases, they can get reviews done faster, and they will already have doses waiting to go (if it turns out to be a good vaccine.) And part of me was a little leery about them not knowing the rare side effects or how rare they’d be.  I mean...every vaccine has its rare side effects and even those of us who are pro-vaccine know there is a risk, but it feels weird not to know what those risks are exactly. 

[Paige]

20 minutes ago, EmseB said:

 

Once it gets rolled out to the public, whomever is in line first won't be the guinea pigs because at that point tens of thousands of people will have already gotten the vax and provided the safety and efficacy data needed to roll it out to the public.

 

I'm no vaccine expert but I'm pretty sure most of the time phase 3 or whatever lasts for a whole lot longer than between now and whenever a roll out is expected even if it's not until the spring. I'm not going to jump in line for a vaccine that is pushed out faster than any in history. I'm pro vaccine too because I trust the system; this time we're not following the system. I understand why it's being rushed, but I'm going to want to wait a while and see how it goes. 

[EmseB]

14 minutes ago, Paige said:

I'm no vaccine expert but I'm pretty sure most of the time phase 3 or whatever lasts for a whole lot longer than between now and whenever a roll out is expected even if it's not until the spring. I'm not going to jump in line for a vaccine that is pushed out faster than any in history. I'm pro vaccine too because I trust the system; this time we're not following the system. I understand why it's being rushed, but I'm going to want to wait a while and see how it goes. 

My understanding is that it normally takes longer primarily because of bureaucratic reasons and funding by drug companies.

So the issue of money is gone (got promising to cover losses and subsidize production) and so is a lot of the red tape, and we are essentially left with *only* testing effectiveness and safety instead of dealing with all of the other issues that normally come with vaccine development.

ETA: I like the summary in this article https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/30/a-huge-experiment-how-the-world-made-so-much-progress-on-a-covid-19-vaccine-so-fast/

ETAA: I would not take a vax without the phase 3 data on safety and efficacy, but if we have that, I wouldn't hesitate.

Edited August 14, 2020 by EmseB

[mathnerd]

34 minutes ago, kdsuomi said:

 

In all honestly, anyone in the first few years of a vaccine who gets it is a guinea pig because the test trials don't show all the bad outcomes. After the safety issues with another fast tracked vaccine, that I won't go into here because it's still a required vaccination, I very hesitant to believe that the trials (especially shorter term than normal) are great vetting for safety, especially long term side effects. I won't debate it any further than that, though, so that this doesn't become a pro-vaccination anti-vaccination thread.

Add to the above, which I heartily agree with, I have no trust in the CDC anymore after they botched the initial test kits, claimed that there is no epidemic etc (and they are responsible along with the FDA for this vaccine).

[Paige]

I just looked up gardasil and it seems it was in phase 3 for 4 years. I don't care what they say, if they normally track people in phase 3 for about 4 years before declaring a vaccine safe and effective and they tell us this one is fine within months, I'm not convinced. That is not just red tape- that's actual people being tracked for 4 years. I mean, maybe the "red tape," otherwise known as rules said you had to wait 4 years. It's easy to have phase 3 data for safety and efficacy when they have changed the rules to match what we have. 

There's some extenuating circumstances that make me believe this one probably will be safer than a vaccine for any random virus. I know people have been working on general coronavirus vaccines for years, for instance, but I'm still going to want to give it a little time. I'm not going to want to wait 4 years if it looks safe, but I'm not going to be first or second in line either. 

[EmseB]

26 minutes ago, Paige said:

I just looked up gardasil and it seems it was in phase 3 for 4 years. I don't care what they say, if they normally track people in phase 3 for about 4 years before declaring a vaccine safe and effective and they tell us this one is fine within months, I'm not convinced. That is not just red tape- that's actual people being tracked for 4 years. I mean, maybe the "red tape," otherwise known as rules said you had to wait 4 years. It's easy to have phase 3 data for safety and efficacy when they have changed the rules to match what we have. 

There's some extenuating circumstances that make me believe this one probably will be safer than a vaccine for any random virus. I know people have been working on general coronavirus vaccines for years, for instance, but I'm still going to want to give it a little time. I'm not going to want to wait 4 years if it looks safe, but I'm not going to be first or second in line either. 

I guess my point was that no one here will be first or second in line. By the time it gets to the public, you'll be 50,000th in line at the absolute soonest.

Anyone I read that is pro-vax is horrified at the Russian vax situation. They aren't for a vaccine, safety be damned. They *are* super optimistic about anything that makes it through phase iii trials with good efficacy and safety data, however. So that is where I lean, myself.

I don't know if looking at the timeline of other vaccines is helpful, tbh.