The Vaccine Thread

[Kanin]

15 hours ago, whitestavern said:

I don't know, honestly. If I weren't being so careful, I'd say Covid, but I am. I'm not afraid of the vaccine in the present - it seems mostly safe - it's any potential long-term unknowns that I worry about. Again, I can't undo it.

In this case, I'd focus my research on the side effects of the vaccine vs. the side effects of Covid. I would take my own personal level of caution out of my judgement, because really, viruses are super super small. A person can be extremely cautious, and still catch Covid.

It may be productive to think about whether it would be good to have the protection of the vaccine (with the risk of any vaccine side effects) if you were to catch Covid (with the risk of any Covid side effects).

For me personally, I believe that the evidence is clear that the risk of the vaccine is infinitesimally smaller than the risk posed by Covid. I also do not want to pass Covid to someone else who may fare worse than I would with it. And truly, people in the 20s and 30s die from Covid, or have long-hauler problems afterwards. It's perfectly possible that I have some underlying condition that I'm not aware of, but that may impact my ability to deal with Covid. 

[wathe]

Canada has authorized Pfizer covid vaccine for 12-15 year olds.  Yay!

If only we had enough to actually give it to them.  Were still stuck at 55 plus and certain health conditions in my province doe to supply problems.  But, supply is supposed to increase later this month and into June.  I think its reasonable to hope that my kids will be able to get shots by September.  Which would be so great!

 

[Penelope]

22 hours ago, Catwoman said:

 

They’re certainly more effective than those stupid single layer gaiters that I still see people wearing, though!

Yes! It’s always a man, too, when I see those. And the bandanas. 
I know they are complying, but honestly, might as well not wear anything if that’s their “mask”
 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Penelope

[Catwoman]

5 minutes ago, Penelope said:

Yes! It’s always a man, too, when I see those. And the bandanas. 
I know they are complying, but honestly, might as well not wear anything if that’s their “mask”
 

I hadn’t thought about it until you mentioned it, but I haven’t seen any women wearing gaiters or bandannas, either!

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Dreamergal said:

Seychelles brings back curbs despite vaccination success - BBC News

Seychelles is 60% vaccinated, now cases are rising. They have the Chinese vaccine or Astra Zeneca. 

They are among the first large population of the vaccine effects wearing off.  

Why "wearing off," per se? 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Dreamergal said:

Can someone explain more about what this means.

Biden Backs Waiving International Patent Protections For COVID-19 Vaccines : Coronavirus Updates : NPR

Is it true that vaccine patents are holding up manufacture on a larger scale ? 

Thanks

DH was talking about this -- he was saying that at least for the mRNA vaccines, that's unlikely to be true, because mRNA vaccines are very hard to make. A lot of technology is involved. 

I don't know the ins and outs of this, though. 

[Shoeless]

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

Why "wearing off," per se? 

If they relied heavily on the Chinese vaccines, well, last I read, those vaccines were only 50% effective. I think Chile relied on the Chinese vaccines, too, and they've had a rough go of it despite a large percentage of the population being vaccinated. 

[Not_a_Number]

6 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

They were vaccinated in January 2021 with the Chinese vaccine and Astra Zeneca, the efficacy of which is in question as far as I know. We are looking at perhaps the need for a booster shot when the efficacy wears off  ?

I'd guess that the effectiveness of those vaccines isn't enough, frankly. 

Has anyone actually evaluated those vaccines with respect to transmission? I know Pfizer has actually studied this in Israel, and those vaccines cut transmission by a lot. But a lot of the more old-fashioned vaccines weren't good at that, IIRC. 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Not_a_Number

[Corraleno]

52 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

Seychelles brings back curbs despite vaccination success - BBC News

Seychelles is 60% vaccinated, now cases are rising. They have the Chinese vaccine or Astra Zeneca. 

They are among the first large population of the vaccine effects wearing off.  

I don't think the effects are "wearing off," just that the vaccines they have may not have very high efficacy against whatever variants are there. Efficacy for Astra Zeneca against the SA variant is only 10%, and Sinovac was barely 50% against the Brazilian variant. (I know Seychelles has Sinopharm not Sinovac, but they are the exact same type of vaccine, just from different manufacturers).

[Kanin]

A woman who lives in the apartment above my mom's has covid. 😞  She has had one of either Pfizer or Moderna. I'm not sure if she got covid before getting vaccinated, or what, but it's scary to think of getting sick even when you've had the protection of one vaccine. Just goes to show you still have to be careful when partially or fully vaccinated. 

[JessBurs]

I am a loooong time lurker on this thread, as I find it one of the more intelligent and less dramatic (for lack of a better term) online discussions out there.

 

Question : does anyone know if they have studied if the vaccines prevent against long covid symptoms/damage in breakthrough cases? It is my understanding that they have great data on drastically reduced hospitalization and death, but like with any vaccine, there are some breakthrough cases, though most of these cases are mild. However, there have also been reports of system damage even after mild/asymptomatic cases. Are we seeing the same thing in the vaccine breakthrough cases?

 

Second question: have any studies been released about the long-term study of system damage in children? I remember the case reports about children who had been asymptomatic having signs of damage. Have any follow up reports been released about how those children have fared over time? Do they show signs of healing?

[ktgrok]

13 hours ago, Dreamergal said:

Seychelles brings back curbs despite vaccination success - BBC News

Seychelles is 60% vaccinated, now cases are rising. They have the Chinese vaccine or Astra Zeneca. 

They are among the first large population of the vaccine effects wearing off.  

We need to be careful - there is no evidence the vaccines are wearing off - they may have variants there that those particular vaccines are not good at preventing. 

[Penelope]

On the Seychelles—

that BBC article says they used mostly Astra Seneca and Sinopharm, which is supposed to be better than Sinovac, but who knows. 
 

But 20% of the cases are from foreigners, which I presume means tourists, and 2/3 of all cases are in unvaccinated people. 1/3 are in the fully vaccinated, which still sounds alarming, but may not be. It depends on the actual numbers and on how long after vaccination they consider someone is fully vaccinated (are many of the cases within a few days of the second dose?). 
 

It also would make a difference if they are testing a lot of asymptomatic people- maybe the vaccinated cases have more asymptomatic or mild cases, but they aren’t actually transmitting it to other people. 

[ktgrok]

7 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

Probably a dumb 101 vaccine question but here is what I am not understanding so please explain to me what is happening in Seychelles.

Based on my understanding of Pfizer and Moderna, we may need booster shots after a while which is in all probability 6 months to a year. 

The people of Seychelles were vaccinated in January, so we are looking at 5 months now. They had the Chinese vaccine mostly. I assume they will be in need of a booster by now. I do not know if the vaccine they had has a booster.

So here is my question, so as the days go by, the effects of the vaccine will decrease and without a booster will cease as far as I understand. I assumed that is what is happening in Seychelles so the cases are rising. (60% of the people were vaccinated). Is my assumption wrong ? 

Thanks.

We know that with the mRNA vaccines, immunity at 6 months was still excellent. 

Many in the Saychelles who are currently infected were not vaccinated. And those that were, were vaccinated with vaccines that are less effective than the mRNA. So it may not be that they need a booster, but it just wasn't that effective in the first place against whatever strain is dominant, plus unvaccinated visitors, etc. 

[Penelope]

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/skorea-says-astrazeneca-pfizer-covid-19-vaccines-87-effective-after-first-shot-2021-05-05/
 

Quote

Data by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) showed the Pfizer vaccine, jointly developed by BioNTech , was 89.7% effective in preventing infection at least two weeks after a first dose was given, while the AstraZeneca shot was 86.0% effective.

Its analysis is based on more than 3.5 million people in South Korea aged 60 and older for two months from Feb. 26 and included 521,133 people who received a first dose of either Pfizer or AstraZeneca shot.

There were 1,237 COVID-19 cases in the data and only 29 were from the vaccinated group, the KDCA said.

Quote

"Around 95% of people who died from the coronavirus in our country were senior citizens aged 60 or older, and the vaccines will sharply lower risks for those people," health ministry official Yoon Tae-ho told a briefing on Wednesday.

 

 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Penelope said:

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/skorea-says-astrazeneca-pfizer-covid-19-vaccines-87-effective-after-first-shot-2021-05-05/
 

 

Ooh, that’s on the high end of what I’ve seen for the first dose.

[RootAnn]

It looks like among breakthrough cases of fully vaccinated individuals, about 1% have died of Covid-19 (112/9,245 per the CDC https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html when you take out the 20 where the CDC says the death was unrelated to covid). I'd be curious to know if they are going to break these numbers down by vaccine type (J&J, Moderna, Pfizer) for the public.

I think 9,245/95,000,000 (# fully vaccinated as of April 26 by CDC page linked above) is .0097% breakthrough rate, but someone check me on that math, please.

[Corraleno]

17 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

Probably a dumb 101 vaccine question but here is what I am not understanding so please explain to me what is happening in Seychelles.

Based on my understanding of Pfizer and Moderna, we may need booster shots after a while which is in all probability 6 months to a year. 

The people of Seychelles were vaccinated in January, so we are looking at 5 months now. They had the Chinese vaccine mostly. I assume they will be in need of a booster by now. I do not know if the vaccine they had has a booster.

So here is my question, so as the days go by, the effects of the vaccine will decrease and without a booster will cease as far as I understand. I assumed that is what is happening in Seychelles so the cases are rising. (60% of the people were vaccinated). Is my assumption wrong ? 

Thanks.

To be clear, no one has said that immunity wears off at 6 months.  In fact, the evidence so far shows excellent immunity after 6 months, and once we have data for 12 months or 18 months, etc., that data may also show good immunity in most people. But immunity does wane over time and some of the new variants (especially the ones with the E484K mutation) seem to be able to evade certain types of antibodies, so the combination of those things + lower immunity in the elderly in general, means that boosters will likely be needed for some people. In one interview I saw, the CEO of Pfizer said he thought boosters would primarily be needed in the fall for over 65s, who have lower immunity to begin with and who are most at risk of severe illness from some of the new variants.

We also know that efficacy for some of the vaccines is much lower against certain variants. AZ is almost totally ineffective against the SA variant — South Africa sold their AZ doses because they're useless there. And who knows what the efficacy of Sinopharm is against different variants.

Without knowing what variants are circulating in the Seychelles, and whether there is a difference in outcome between AZ vaccinated, Sinopharm vaccinated, and unvaccinated people, there's no way to know what is really going on there. But the idea that vaccine-induced immunity just suddenly wore off in the entire population after 4 months is the least likely possibility.

[Penelope]

45 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

Probably a dumb 101 vaccine question but here is what I am not understanding so please explain to me what is happening in Seychelles.

Based on my understanding of Pfizer and Moderna, we may need booster shots after a while which is in all probability 6 months to a year. 

The people of Seychelles were vaccinated in January, so we are looking at 5 months now. They had the Chinese vaccine mostly. I assume they will be in need of a booster by now. I do not know if the vaccine they had has a booster.

So here is my question, so as the days go by, the effects of the vaccine will decrease and without a booster will cease as far as I understand. I assumed that is what is happening in Seychelles so the cases are rising. (60% of the people were vaccinated). Is my assumption wrong ? 

Thanks.

They had more doses of Astra Zeneca than Sinopharm, enough for 45,000 vs. enough doses for 25,000 people with Sinopharm. But they got the Sinopharm first, and the people first vaccinated were with Sinopharm, some of whom were in the tourist industry and are probably more likely to be infected. From here: https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/seychelles-bids-reach-covid-herd-immunity-mid-march-76220535

My wild guess would be that the breakthrough infections were more in the younger working people who got the Sinopharm. They still might not be infectious to others, but some of them are in healthcare and tourism and most likely to be exposed.

Maybe one reason they are having trouble, too, is that they went for an essential workers first strategy in vaccination, and have fewer of their more vulnerable citizens protected. I have no basis for thinking that, but we do know who is generally more likely to end up in the hospital.
 

 

[Pen]

On 5/4/2021 at 10:51 AM, KSera said:

Not at all. There’s no formal argument hidden in those questions at all. It’s just an honest wondering that has been coming to my mind as I watch the situationa unfolding around the world, and right now, specifically in India, with much sadness. When I’m on the one hand watching that and on the other hand seeing people in other places trying to cast doubt on the vaccine and talk people out of it, those are just the kind of questions that come to my mind. I’m wondering if they’re seeing the same things I am, what are they thinking about it, and do they think the vaccine question has a different answer for those places than it does in the US.

I feel very sad about people dying wherever they are ... certainly the pictures of funeral pyres crowded together in India is heart wrenching and tear inducing. 
 

I do not believe that there is one answer for every person or for that matter for every place. 
 

I was vaccinated for smallpox (and yellow fever and lots of other things) .  I was probably at no personal risk whatsoever from smallpox, or certainly at least minuscule, but I “did my bit”  to possibly help achieve small pox eradication by having had that vaccine. That made sense to me.
 

But this situation and these vaccines are different, imo, very different. 
And though you may want me to take the CV19 vaccine and to push everyone to do so. (Or at least not discourage anyone in the tiniest iota) I do not think it makes sense for everyone and certainly does not for me. I am sure that I am at least as sad that you cannot understand that as you are whatever emotion you have that I am refusing to agree with your POV. 

I am not sure if we can even agree on basics as for example what CV vaccine would do assuming it is/they are good ones and does/do what the stats claim, with no nefarious plots, no accidental contaminations, and no unanticipated negative consequences (for example, no unusual secondhand transmission of vaccine related illness, no  increased illnesses (clots etc) that in some age groups might cause overall death rate higher than the illness itself does, no pressure on virus to increase mutation, no longer term increase in cancer, autoimmunity, etc).  Probably we would not agree even on some basic rule of thumb ways to look at it, but anyway, personally, as I read the information I have had available, whether using absolute or relative risk reduction as I have read them, very generally without parsing each detail for each of the available vaccines, I would  for purposes of my own decision making or someone dear to me, estimate  about 20 fold lower chance of contracting symptomatic illness after the vaccine (full doses plus waiting time).  That is, 20 fold lower from whatever is the relevant attack rate ... which may not be the same, for example, in a big city in India and a rural part of Midwest USA.  And may not be the same for all ages, or other variations.  20 fold lower incidence of symptomatic illness is (no pun  originally intended) nothing to sneeze at. But it’s going to be different for different individual people and groups. 
 

For example, guesstimating in a sweeping way, for someone who is social and active (normally attends theater, events, works and or visits others indoors) in a dense urban environment a vaccine might reduce that aspect of risk ( contracting a symptomatic case) from 20% to 1% and be huge huge huge for that person, especially if a person tends to do very well with vaccines usually, and perhaps tends to do poorly with illnesses (catching every little thing that goes around and maybe already having a history of hospital level respiratory infections . (This pretty much was my father’s situation. To a lesser degree it’s similar to the situation for several people I know in NYC. And Portland, OR. And Los Angeles. ) 

Another person might be in an area where they may only have a likely risk of contracting the virus of around 1% in first place - so very low even without the 20 fold reduction. And then maybe that person tends to do poorly with vaccines but extremely well with actual illness. So if they already have the same low likelihood of contracting the infection without a vaccine as the dense urban dweller has with the vaccine, and then perhaps from Personal experience a bigger chance of doing poorly with vaccine but doing well with illness - that hugely changes analysis imo of what should be done.  Hugely changes risk/benefit analysis for taking an experimental vaccine. 

The situation for children is also imo very different than for adults.  Most children have an incredibly tiny risk of personal severe consequences from the illness itself, and  because they would  be expected to live a long time, all the long term unknown unknowns are likely to be more significant for them.  It is very unusual for people to put children at risk to save adults. That is not the way I was raised. But again I think I am generationally different than most of you, and my views on aboiding potentially increasing children’s long term risk to try to protect / save the grandparent or great grandparent generation is probably old fashioned and no longer the way things are done by the majority.  Btw it is not that I expect huge numbers of children to drop dead soon after the vaccine, but if it’s currently a 0.001 % death rate for a cohort and it goes up to 0.01 % - that’s not the way I would choose to go even though very small. I don’t have any figures yet on children, so that’s an example, not intended to reflect what actual results may come out. Again, that’s me, personally. Your “mileage may vary” and indeed almost certainly  does vary enormously from mine. 

 

I doubt further discussion will get us anywhere. 
 

Maybe in a couple of years we can readdress it. With better hindsight. Maybe one of us will have changed our mind by then. Or perhaps both of us may have a different viewpoint by then. Or Maybe not. 
 

Anyway, again I am wishing you, and everyone, truly all the best, no sarcasm. 

 

 

[Laura Corin]

Interesting historical-to-present-day podcast about vaccines, attitudes to risk and consequences of actions to others.

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vY2F1dGlvbmFyeXRhbGVz/episode/NTY5MTgzZDYtNzUxZi0xMWViLTlmNDYtYmZkMTMwY2U0ZmJl?ep=14

[Wheres Toto]

On 5/4/2021 at 6:33 PM, Terabith said:

Out of curiosity, why is Pfizer beating Moderna at all of these?  Any ideas?

 

On 5/4/2021 at 6:37 PM, Not_a_Number said:

Bigger company? Just a guess. 

Bigger company, more $$$, more experience with vaccines, facilities already in place, and I believe they were already studying the technology involved before the pandemic. 

[ktgrok]

8 hours ago, Pen said:

unusual secondhand transmission of vaccine related illness,

Can you clarify this? Are you saying you are concerned about people with the vaccine "transmitting" the vaccine to others? 

[ktgrok]

And can someone concerned about long term side effects give an example of a side effect caused by a vaccine that didn't occur until over 6 months after the vaccine was given?

[Penelope]

9 hours ago, Wheres Toto said:

 

Bigger company, more $$$, more experience with vaccines, facilities already in place, and I believe they were already studying the technology involved before the pandemic. 

BioNTech was studying it. Pfizer did not get together with them until after the pandemic began. Basically BioNTech is all the brain power and technology, and Pfizer has the manufacturing capacity, Investment $, and marketing to make it happen. More or less.

Edited May 7, 2021 by Penelope

[whitestavern]

12 hours ago, ktgrok said:

And can someone concerned about long term side effects give an example of a side effect caused by a vaccine that didn't occur until over 6 months after the vaccine was given?

My DH (and me, actually) has pretty severe tinnitus. One third of vaccine recipients report tinnitus as a side effect. We read about someone who killed themselves after being vaccinated it was so bad. As someone who had it, I can say it was one of the worst health events I ever experienced.And while mine has subsided, DH's case is still pretty severe. I can't imagine it becoming worse. I have no idea "when" it hits someone, but it's still a concern. 

Quote

 

 

[Penelope]

I think what @ktgrok meant is problems that begin  or show up only months after receiving the vaccine. That is what some people mean by long term affects, as in there used to be a thought that childhood vaccines could trigger some children to develop type 1 diabetes; that’s something that was investigated and not found. Same with Hepatitis B and MS. 
Some people now are hesitant with mRNA because some of it could theoretically be taken up by other tissues rather than the desired local target tissues.

Some vaccine reactions do have lasting effects, it’s true, but the ones that have been well-documented have occurred within a couple of months of vaccination. It’s not like you get a vaccine and then the tinnitus or low platelets or temporary paralysis happens six months later.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Penelope

[KSera]

2 minutes ago, Penelope said:

Some people now are hesitant with mRNA because some of it could theoretically be taken up by other tissues rather than the desired local target tissues.

Do you know any more about what they are afraid of happening with this? mRNA doesn’t persist very long in the body, so I’m trying to think what the concern with that would be. The mRNA in the vaccine can only instruct cells to make spike proteins, so I’m not sure what people would be worried would happen instead of that. 

[TCB]

21 minutes ago, whitestavern said:

My DH (and me, actually) has pretty severe tinnitus. One third of vaccine recipients report tinnitus as a side effect. We read about someone who killed themselves after being vaccinated it was so bad. As someone who had it, I can say it was one of the worst health events I ever experienced.And while mine has subsided, DH's case is still pretty severe. I can't imagine it becoming worse. I have no idea "when" it hits someone, but it's still a concern. 

 

I think maybe you are talking about the Texas Roadhouse owner. If so I think he got tinnitus after having Covid not after the vaccine.

ETA - Could you point me in the direction of the information saying 1/3 of vaccine recipients report tinnitus as a side effect?

Edited May 8, 2021 by TCB

[Penelope]

18 minutes ago, KSera said:

Do you know any more about what they are afraid of happening with this? mRNA doesn’t persist very long in the body, so I’m trying to think what the concern with that would be. The mRNA in the vaccine can only instruct cells to make spike proteins, so I’m not sure what people would be worried would happen instead of that. 

From the questions I have heard of on Q and A or podcasts, the implications of what would happen are vague. Like, immune system=mysterious, who knows what will happen, and we don’t know what we don’t know. Not just mRNA, but the spike protein hanging around  in the body and causing inflammation in different organs. I’m not sure what the overtly anti vaccination sites or groups say about it.

[Pen]

13 hours ago, ktgrok said:

Can you clarify this? Are you saying you are concerned about people with the vaccine "transmitting" the vaccine to others? 

I was trying to indicate taking the vaccine at full “face value” and assuming no unanticipated problems, how I would personally evaluate it (in a very sweeping way, not going into exact number differences between types or anything like that) - just assuming vaccines are all as great as claimed by their proponents 

 

I then mentioned parenthetically some of the potential issues that some are concerned about .... that I was not looking at for purposes of my broad evaluation taking the vaccine as working perfectly as it “should” with no issues. 
 

  My understanding is that second hand transmission is a concern some people have. So it was in my parenthetical of what I was Not taking into account. (For example if discussing and evaluating with my father or a friend.) 

 

I do not myself feel particularly concerned about that personally. It at least is not the way a good vaccine “should” work.
 

It “should” in this case have the little packet of vaccine stuff enter a cell, do its thing (like make spike protein) inside the cell, present antigen on surface of cell.
 

Immune system should respond to the antigen presented on cell surface, and start making antibodies, make memory T cells, do all that acquired immune activity that normally happens in response to traditional vaccines. Cell that was presenting the antigen on its surface should be destroyed and all the vaccine stuff it did (mRNA for Moderna and Pfizer, or DNA in case of JJ or AZ) spike protein etc, should be destroyed along with the cell, and the debris should be cleaned up by body waste clean up systems and safely excreted. 
 

So at least in theory there “should” not be second hand transmission of any vaccine related stuff. Not of the vaccine itself, and not of the spike protein. 
 

whether “should “ will end up matching reality in this case of experimental vaccines I do not know

I am inclined to take seriously at least the worries and reports of people who say they are experiencing problems, just as I would take seriously your worries and concerns about your sister which I tried to help with by writing a letter

And just as I would and did take seriously the concerns of parents who said their children had what we now call PANDAS — even when many called that a bunch of baloney much like many now are ridiculing the reports from people saying they are having secondhand vaccine issues. 
 

ps in addition to issues because of experimental nature of these vaccines, location of cells receiving the packets of vaccine stuff is also potentially a major problem

 

sorry about “stuff”  what I mean is the lipid enclosed packet of mRNA or the adenovirus packet of DNA as case may be

Edited May 8, 2021 by Pen

[JessBurs]

14 hours ago, ktgrok said:

And can someone concerned about long term side effects give an example of a side effect caused by a vaccine that didn't occur until over 6 months after the vaccine was given?

At least for me, I get concerned seeing reports like this https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.03.21256520v1. Yes, I know it is preprint, but in general I feel that since this first time an mrna vaccine is given to such a huge number of people, it is possible unforeseen issues like this will occur.

I am actually fully vaccinated with an mrna option, but keep oscillating about what to do with my two elementary schoolers when the time comes. 

I would like to see some follow up reports re: the system damage reported in children even after asymptomatic cases.

I have also heard some discussion about the 1889-1890 pandemic having been potentially caused by a different coronavirus, resulting in a similar situation to today, but that coronavirus is now just responsible for a common cold as humanity adjusted. 

With recent reports about this becoming simply endemic eventually, and that herd immunity likely will not occur but that vaccines will simply get the public health emergency under control, it seems as though most of us will likely get it eventually-- vaccine or no (variants, break through infections, immunity wearing off in between boosters as the public becomes more relaxed about this 3, 4, 10 years into the future, etc-- we will just likely get minor infections) so the threat of body system damage is not really mitigated in the long term... it all comes together to make me wonder if vaccination is a suitable risk for my children.

Sorry that came out as a bit more stream of consciousness than I intended. Let me know if anything doesn't make sense, and I hope no one minds me jumping in 6 months into the discussion 🙂

[Pen]

@ktgrok

ps also, If I were vaccinated and I knew someone who was worried about secondhand issues, especially if pregnant woman concerned about her fetus, I would take that every bit as seriously as I would take what I assume must be your concerns about your child who needs to avoid gluten not being given the least bit of gluten. It is so easy to ridicule and not take seriously the concerns of others while wanting ones own to be taken seriously. And maybe the secondhand vaccine issues will turn out to have just been fear with no basis... but otoh maybe it will turn out to be a serious real problem even if like PANDAS or celiac not affecting everyone. 
 

[Penelope]

27 minutes ago, JessBurs said:

With recent reports about this becoming simply endemic eventually, and that herd immunity likely will not occur but that vaccines will simply get the public health emergency under control, it seems as though most of us will likely get it eventually-- vaccine or no (variants, break through infections, immunity wearing off in between boosters as the public becomes more relaxed about this 3, 4, 10 years into the future, etc-- we will just likely get minor infections) so the threat of body system damage is not really mitigated in the long term... it all comes together to make me wonder if vaccination is a suitable risk for my children.

Sorry that came out as a bit more stream of consciousness than I intended. Let me know if anything doesn't make sense, and I hope no one minds me jumping in 6 months into the discussion 🙂

That is the sense I have gotten, too. I got vaccinated to avoid hospitalization and severe complications. I do not have an expectation that I will never get infected; if I’m lucky, I won’t, but next best would be that I get infected and don’t know I have it, or have some symptoms that are soon over. Will having asymptomatic or milder disease prevent most long Covid? I would think and hope so, but I don’t think that is the primary reason to get vaccinated. 
 

I haven’t decided about my younger children, either. Here is an opinion from a pediatric infectious disease specialist that brings up some concerns that he thinks need to be addressed before widespread vaccination of children. I find it interesting that he says since MIS-C does not seem to be a viral process and it isn’t understood very well, we would want to be sure vaccination would not lead to more of it. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00212-7/fulltext
I don’t know what to make of it, but it is something that is on my radar to hear more about. Though I guess if there is anything to it, we might see something happen when the 12-15’s get it. 
 

Quote

 

 

[Doug4907]

An update on serious blood clotting issues from AZ in Australia.

The government just released the latest on blood clots from AZ.  You will recall that the AZ vaccine results in a very particular type of blood clotting making IDing the source of the clots relatively straight forward..

Our gov is very nervous about releasing such data, and I would not be surprised if some/much was being withheld.  When cases are made public it is usually 2 or more weeks after the event has been determined.  Treating hospitals cannot release such data.  Case reports have to go to the gov and the gov decides what is released.  sigh ...

The latest release detailed an additional five cases.  All cases notified to the public are requiring long hospitalisation, occasionally ICU.  The official numbers indicate one death, in total, from these peculiar clotting events.  All clotting cases are in individuals over 50 yo.  My calculations suggest that the rate of (reported) cases is a little less than 1:100,000.

The problem with a member of the public calculating the rate is that we have two figures to use.  1, the number of vaccinations with AZ, and 2, the official number of severe clotting, which we know lags by some weeks the number of vaccinations.  You may recall that my previous posting on this side effect in which I calculated a rate of about 1 in 200,000 with the same caveat of the delay in reporting.  So, as expected, as the vaccinations continue, the true rate will will undoubtedly worsen, and will asymptote to maybe 1:75,000 (my latest guess).

I find it terribly disappointing that the Australian gov is severely massaging any information that the public receives, and our government is the main source of misinformation.  Misinformation is the wrong word.  Some of the info they release is intentionally erroneous.  As an Australian, I am very embarrassed to report that most lies come directly from the mouth of our popular PM.  Our experience with previous PMs had resulted in most members of the public taking what is said by any PM to be the truth, and that belief is still strongly entrenched.

Australia has weathered the virus very well aided obviously by our isolation.  Our states took charge of quarantine, etc, and have done a superlative effort.

My wife and I continue to have no recognisable side effects from the AZ vaccine (first dose only) 6 weeks ago.

Take care good people,

Doug

[ktgrok]

11 hours ago, whitestavern said:

One third of vaccine recipients report tinnitus as a side effect. 

 

Source? We gave a side effect poll here and threads on it and certainly we are no seeing close to that. 

11 hours ago, Penelope said:

I think what @ktgrok meant is problems that begin  or show up only months after receiving the vaccine.

Some people now are hesitant with mRNA because some of it could theoretically be taken up by other tissues rather than the desired local target tissues.

Some vaccine reactions do have lasting effects, it’s true, but the ones that have been well-documented have occurred within a couple of months of vaccination. It’s not like you get a vaccine and then the tinnitus or low platelets or temporary paralysis happens six months later.

Right. Not sure what the concern would be with "other tissues" taking up the mRNA. it wouldn't matter really what tissues took it up, that I can figure. 

11 hours ago, Pen said:

 

And just as I would and did take seriously the concerns of parents who said their children had what we now call PANDAS — even when many called that a bunch of baloney much like many now are ridiculing the reports from people saying they are having secondhand vaccine issues. 
 

 

9 hours ago, Pen said:

@ktgrok

ps also, If I were vaccinated and I knew someone who was worried about secondhand issues, especially if pregnant woman concerned about her fetus, I would take that every bit as seriously as I would take what I assume must be your concerns about your child who needs to avoid gluten not being given the least bit of gluten. 

But...there are biological basis and plausibility for these issues. Even those doctors who don't think PANDAS is a long term issue acknowledge HOW strep can cause brain inflammation. We know that from AE and from other issues strep can cause. Even if one doesn't agree that it DOES cause brain inflammation, there is a biological explanation for how it COULD do that. 

And of course, we have Celiac mapped out totally - know exactly what ezymes are responsible for the reaction, can visualize the damage under a microscope, etc. 

But there is NO plausible biological possibility that a person who is vaccinated with Covid can cause another person to be infertile. 1. We have tests showing that the particular thing people thought MIGHT cause a cross reaction with a placental protein does not, and isn't even similar to it. 2. there is no live virus, or even partial virus, to "infect" another person.

For that matter, ME eating gluten and hanging out with my son won't and cannot hurt him, even though he has celiac. 

[Not_a_Number]

10 hours ago, Penelope said:

I find it interesting that he says since MIS-C does not seem to be a viral process and it isn’t understood very well, we would want to be sure vaccination would not lead to more of it. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00212-7/fulltext

Here's the quote I found from the journal: 

 

"Most patients at presentation have a negative nasopharyngeal RT-PCR but are positive for serology. This temporal association and low PCR positivity rate suggest a postinfectious mechanism rather than acute viral infection." 

 

I feel like it's a bit of a stretch to say that we know that it's a post-infectious mechanism as opposed to viral infection. As far as I can tell, there's very limited understanding of how long COVID works and MIS-C seems like a genre of long COVID. 

The rate of MIS-C is very low, so I suppose it'd be hard to catch via trials in kids, hmmm. I can see having a "wait and see" approach here, but I dunno -- that makes me nervous. 

 

 

[Not_a_Number]

Thinking more about MIS-C... I suppose they'll see it in the 12-15 group if there's genuinely an effect. I hope this doesn't happen.

[Pen]

On 5/8/2021 at 6:35 AM, ktgrok said:

Source? We gave a side effect poll here and threads on it and certainly we are no seeing close to that. 

Right. Not sure what the concern would be with "other tissues" taking up the mRNA. it wouldn't matter really what tissues took it up, that I can figure. 

 

But...there are biological basis and plausibility for these issues. Even those doctors who don't think PANDAS is a long term issue acknowledge HOW strep can cause brain inflammation. We know that from AE and from other issues strep can cause. Even if one doesn't agree that it DOES cause brain inflammation, there is a biological explanation for how it COULD do that. 

And of course, we have Celiac mapped out totally - know exactly what ezymes are responsible for the reaction, can visualize the damage under a microscope, etc. 

But there is NO plausible biological possibility that a person who is vaccinated with Covid can cause another person to be infertile. 1. We have tests showing that the particular thing people thought MIGHT cause a cross reaction with a placental protein does not, and isn't even similar to it. 2. there is no live virus, or even partial virus, to "infect" another person.

For that matter, ME eating gluten and hanging out with my son won't and cannot hurt him, even though he has celiac. 

actually, Katie, I can think of lots of possible mechanisms based on my time long ago studying biological sciences. It is not the way it “should” ideally and theoretically work. But it could.  
 

Virus is not “live” in the first place, in the same way as a multicellular organism or bacteria.  Which when ripped apart become dead, usually.
 

Though even then anyone who has had a bad herxheimer reaction as a reaction to the dead stuff and toxins put out from some organisms might be able dispute the idea that “dead” means “no problem”. 
 

So anyway back to SARS2 mRNA in lipid bundles and DNA in adenovirus type “vaccine stuff”—generally we start with an assumption that spike particles alone can’t do anything. And probably assumptions that either they can’t be breathed out, or at least that even if they can be breathed out and someone else can breathe them in, that they would not affect the secondhand person. And also assumptions that the “vaccine stuff” itself cannot be self replicating and excreted (say breathed out) by one person and taken in by another

But have all of those possibilities (and more possible besides) been proven not possible in robust RCT trials? I have not seen any evidence of that. If you can link such studies I would be very interested!

a few possibilities (not probabilities but possibilities) out of many to consider—

 

Spike protein similarity to Syncytin-1

ETA thus  effects directly or indirectly (such as due to antibodies to spike destroying tissue with syncytin such as placenta or sperm or brain?) involving tissue with syncytin-1

Spike not only can bind with ACE2, it can also bind with CD147.  If some people had unusually susceptible cd147 and if spike alone can bind to it,  that’s a potential route for secondhand bleeding issues .

it’s also conceivable that spikes could become combinant with exosomes to form dangerous quasi virions

it’s also possible that the vaccinated would harbor virions that are mutating due to survival pressure put on them by the vaccination and could infect others with different symptoms than we had formerly been seeing much of

——

People now can give reasons for mechanisms for celiac or PANDAS — but not originally, especially celiac happening before contemporary lab equipment and understandings were available. It had to be figured out. And okay, your son can be near someone eating gluten and be fine. But some people with celiac are probably more or less sensitive to minute particles. And in any case it is a problem primarily from eating. Not respiratory afaik.

Spike fragments, if actually a problem, or any other possible issue going on, might turn out to be a respiratory aerosols based problem. 

Personally, I tend to go for compassion, and open mindedness that what people say they are experiencing is true (like for Gluten issues before a mechanism was figured out—many years ago, when it seemed ridiculous to many that wheat, the staff of life, might adversely affect someone—and when I have heard that celiac families were even shunned by community because of having children dying in what seemed like something was “wrong” with the family, maybe contagious, maybe bad people ...        I don’t know it that’s true, but I read that in relation to things happening before the banana treatment)— not ridicule.  Golden Rule, and all that. 

Anyway I’ll do me, and you do you. 

Edited May 10, 2021 by Pen

[ktgrok]

If you are saying that it is not disproven that the spike protein produced by the body of a vaccinated person might be breathed out, then breathed back in by a different person, and then it cause infertility in that person. sure. It is also not disproven that getting the vaccine can make you reverse age and turn into benjamin button. But it is not a valid concern, either, given the bounds of science. 

If someone said they are not going to get vaccinated because they want to be sure it doesn't make their dog turn into a cat, and we haven't disproven that theory yet....well, I can be concerned about them, but I'm not going to take that concern seriously. 

There are a lot of concerns I truly do take seriously, especially autoimmune reactions. I am not one who says vaccines can't cause harm. But at some point the concerns are nonsensical. That a vaccinated person is going to transmit infertility to people around them falls into that category. 

[Pen]

5 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

If you are saying that it is not disproven that the spike protein produced by the body of a vaccinated person might be breathed out, then breathed back in by a different person, and then it cause infertility in that person. sure. It is also not disproven that getting the vaccine can make you reverse age and turn into benjamin button. But it is not a valid concern, either, given the bounds of science. 

If someone said they are not going to get vaccinated because they want to be sure it doesn't make their dog turn into a cat, and we haven't disproven that theory yet....well, I can be concerned about them, but I'm not going to take that concern seriously. 

There are a lot of concerns I truly do take seriously, especially autoimmune reactions. I am not one who says vaccines can't cause harm. But at some point the concerns are nonsensical. That a vaccinated person is going to transmit infertility to people around them falls into that category. 

Perhaps.

It does seem a stretch doesn’t it!

 

Maybe because for vaccines in my childhood it ended up acknowledged that 10-30% of polio vaccine had been contaminated with simian virus, and that at another point some other vaccine (can’t recall what) was contaminated with mouse viruses (and I think actually those contamination’s may be related to some potential long term problems, some people think), I am more open to the possibility that something could be going on beyond the obvious of what “should” be the case.  And I think quite a few years later, there’s still dispute over whether some 10-30 percent  of some sort of vaccines (TT?) in some part of Africa were contaminated with HGF (causing miscarriages? Infertility? Do you remember?) 

To me the “jury is still out” on current situation (s).
 

 But it’s okay with me if others feel fully decided — either way. 
 

And I am not being sarcastic, btw. I don’t know how tone comes across. But I really do feel it is ok to be different. To have different ideas. Different comfort levels.
 

I even think there’s group safety in pursuing different actions and comfort levels.
 

  Maybe / probably most people will do fine whatever decisions they make around vaccines and avoiding or not avoiding those who decided differently.  In either direction—the vaccinated fearful of the unvaccinated or Vice versa.
 

But just in case either not vaccinating or vaccinating ends up having been a deadly choice, maybe instead of the two “sides” hating and or fearing each other and separating ever farther apart like a Grand Canyon or maybe Mariana Trench, Great rift division is between them/us, perhaps especially those parents with younger children or pregnant should be befriending each other across the rift so that if either friend or perhaps cousin or sibling on other side of the rift chose wrong in what later turns out to have been a fatal choice, the other friend or cousin or sibling can raise the children.  And maybe do so with an attitude of “It was a hard time. Everyone made the best choices they could figure out. Your parents loved you very much and made what seemed at the time like the best choice they could,”  which if genuinely felt may be better for surviving children than a feeling of “your stupid, nonsensical parents made a terrible decision” — just a thought 🤔😊🌷🕊🍀🦋

Ill probably be gone for a few days. And may not return to this thread.  pM me if you want to discuss further. 🌷🌻🌝🍀💕🌴🐾🦮

[Syllieann]

2 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

Thinking more about MIS-C... I suppose they'll see it in the 12-15 group if there's genuinely an effect. I hope this doesn't happen.

Yeah, honestly, I'm not going to feel good about vaccinating my 12 yo until we get to around a million doses given without any major issues.  My 12 yo has such low exposure to contracting covid and low chance of passing it on due to extremely limited contact with unvaccinated adults and only outdoor exposure to other kids from relatively careful families.  Combined with an extremely low rate of complications if he were to get covid, there's no way I'm charging ahead after the trials that only included a couple thousand.  Even if the vaccine induces MIS-C at the same rate infection did, I don't think we'd see it in the trials.

Edited May 8, 2021 by Syllieann

[Not_a_Number]

4 minutes ago, Syllieann said:

Yeah, honestly, I'm not going to feel good about vaccinating my 12 yo until we get to around a million doses given without any major issues.  My 12 yo has such low exposure to contracting covid and low chance of passing it on due to extremely limited contact with unvaccinated adults and only outdoor exposure to other kids from relatively careful families.  Combined with an extremely low rate of complications if he were to get covid, there's no way I'm charging ahead after the trials that only included a couple thousand.  Even if the vaccine induces MIS-C at the same rate infection did, I don't think we'd see it in the trials.

I don’t know if we actually have a good sense for the rate of MIS-C... but it’s probably closer to 0.1% than 1% and could therefore easily be missed in trials. 

On the other hand, I really want to get my kids back into their activities!! I think that if the 12-15 rollout is uneventful, I’ll be perfectly happy to get the vaccine for my kids by September.

[ktgrok]

46 minutes ago, Pen said:

Perhaps.

It does seem a stretch doesn’t it!

 

Maybe because for vaccines in my childhood it ended up acknowledged that 10-30% of polio vaccine had been contaminated with simian virus, and that at another point some other vaccine (can’t recall what) was contaminated with mouse viruses (and I think actually those contamination’s may be related to some potential long term problems, some people think), I am more open to the possibility that something could be going on beyond the obvious of what “should” be the case.  And I think quite a few years later, there’s still dispute over whether some 10-30 percent  of some sort of vaccines (TT?) in some part of Africa were contaminated with HGF (causing miscarriages? Infertility? Do you remember?) 

To me the “jury is still out” on current situation (s).
 

 But it’s okay with me if others feel fully decided — either way. 
 

And I am not being sarcastic, btw. I don’t know how tone comes across. But I really do feel it is ok to be different. To have different ideas. Different comfort levels.
 

I even think there’s group safety in pursuing different actions and comfort levels.
 

  Maybe / probably most people will do fine whatever decisions they make around vaccines and avoiding or not avoiding those who decided differently.  In either direction—the vaccinated fearful of the unvaccinated or Vice versa.
 

But just in case either not vaccinating or vaccinating ends up having been a deadly choice, maybe instead of the two “sides” hating and or fearing each other and separating ever farther apart like a Grand Canyon or maybe Mariana Trench, Great rift division is between them/us, perhaps especially those parents with younger children or pregnant should be befriending each other across the rift so that if either friend or perhaps cousin or sibling on other side of the rift chose wrong in what later turns out to have been a fatal choice, the other friend or cousin or sibling can raise the children.  And maybe do so with an attitude of “It was a hard time. Everyone made the best choices they could figure out. Your parents loved you very much and made what seemed at the time like the best choice they could,”  which if genuinely felt may be better for surviving children than a feeling of “your stupid, nonsensical parents made a terrible decision” — just a thought 🤔😊🌷🕊🍀🦋

Ill probably be gone for a few days. And may not return to this thread.  pM me if you want to discuss further. 🌷🌻🌝🍀💕🌴🐾🦮

But there was a biologically plausible way that the polio vaccine in the 1950s was contaminated - they were using monkey cells, and the cells had a virus. (and it turned out no, not related to health problems anyway...same cancers showed up at same rates in people who never got those contaminated vaccines). 

There are biologically plausible issues with any vaccine, but some of the ones being cited are not in that category. 

[Penelope]

3 hours ago, ktgrok said:

 

Right. Not sure what the concern would be with "other tissues" taking up the mRNA. it wouldn't matter really what tissues took it up, that I can figure. 

Well, there is research showing that the spike protein itself seems to have some effects, in animal models, though I don’t know much about that. It might not be good to have these proteins manufactured by cells in our nervous system, heart, blood vessels, for example. I would think that with vaccine, the amount of mRNA getting into circulation and going other places is very small, if any, and that seems to be the thinking from what I’ve heard. I don’t know if there is anything to this or not; I was articulating a concern that I’ve seen expressed by others.
 

For me, the choice is easy for an adult, especially ones above a certain age. The vaccine generally appears safe, and Covid is bad. This outweighs any theoretical unknowns, and outweighs the fact that normally, we would not have millions of people take a brand-new vaccine after only a few months of testing. 

1 hour ago, ktgrok said:

 

There are a lot of concerns I truly do take seriously, especially autoimmune reactions. I am not one who says vaccines can't cause harm. But at some point the concerns are nonsensical. That a vaccinated person is going to transmit infertility to people around them falls into that category. 

I agree, this particular one makes no sense. 

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, Penelope said:

This outweighs any theoretical unknowns, and outweighs the fact that normally, we would not have millions of people take a brand-new vaccine after only a few months of testing. 

I wonder if that's true. Yes, we might have technically have a longer time between the Phase 3 trials and general rollout, but do we actually monitor the Phase 3 participants well after the trial is over? Plus, some things are genuinely rare enough that they'll be above the level of noise only once you roll out to millions. 

[Penelope]

25 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I wonder if that's true. Yes, we might have technically have a longer time between the Phase 3 trials and general rollout, but do we actually monitor the Phase 3 participants well after the trial is over? Plus, some things are genuinely rare enough that they'll be above the level of noise only once you roll out to millions. 

Current phase three trials are still ongoing, to two years past the second dose. With these trials, though, all the placebo recipients will have been offered the vaccine. But there will be close safety monitoring, which is useful. I don’t know the typical length of a phase 3 vaccine trial, but it is longer than the two months, and that for only some of the participants, that we saw for the Covid vaccines in the US. 
 

Of course you’re right that the rare events are often only caught after a drug or device is on the market for a while, or even a more common effect that takes some time to become apparent. There is a long list of things that have been taken off the market, more drugs than vaccines, but there are a few vaccines, too. Once the pandemic crisis is over, we might even see the adenovirus vector vaccines eventually pulled. 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Penelope said:

Current phase three trials are still ongoing, to two years past the second dose. With these trials, though, all the placebo recipients will have been offered the vaccine. But there will be close safety monitoring, which is useful. I don’t know the typical length of a phase 3 vaccine trial, but it is longer than the two months, and that for only some of the participants, that we saw for the Covid vaccines in the US. 

I think the safety monitoring is MUCH harder to do right with everyone in the placebo group offered the vaccine, though 😕 . Like, it becomes an observational study -- you start having to compare to "similar populations" instead of the control group, and that's highly fallible. 

I think these Phase 3 trials were bigger than standard Phase 3 trials as well? I'd be curious how long people are usually actively monitored in Phase 3 trials. Looking it up, they say that trials last for a few years, but I don't know if that means active monitoring for that many years or just active monitoring for a while with rolling entry into the trial. If someone knows how this is normally done, I'd be curious. 

 

Just now, Penelope said:

Of course you’re right that the rare events are often only caught after a drug or device is on the market for a while, or even a more common effect that takes some time to become apparent. There is a long list of things that have been taken off the market, more drugs than vaccines, but there are a few vaccines, too. Once the pandemic crisis is over, we might even see the adenovirus vector vaccines eventually pulled. 

Of course. You'd expect that -- some effects are relatively small, so you really do wind up needing a lot of people exposed before you can tell the difference between an effect and noise. 

[Syllieann]

1 hour ago, Not_a_Number said:

I think the safety monitoring is MUCH harder to do right with everyone in the placebo group offered the vaccine, though 😕 . Like, it becomes an observational study -- you start having to compare to "similar populations" instead of the control group, and that's highly fallible. 

I think these Phase 3 trials were bigger than standard Phase 3 trials as well? I'd be curious how long people are usually actively monitored in Phase 3 trials. Looking it up, they say that trials last for a few years, but I don't know if that means active monitoring for that many years or just active monitoring for a while with rolling entry into the trial. If someone knows how this is normally done, I'd be curious. 

 

Of course. You'd expect that -- some effects are relatively small, so you really do wind up needing a lot of people exposed before you can tell the difference between an effect and noise. 

They call it phase iv and monitor it for years after approval.  It's also being sold during that time.  I remember when they rolled out the hpv vaccine.  They made it covered and recommended for the target group at highest risk first, then a few years later expanded the age range.  After that data they expanded to males.  That was essentially a decade from start to end.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Syllieann said:

They call it phase iv and monitor it for years after approval.  It's also being sold during that time.  I remember when they rolled out the hpv vaccine.  They made it covered and recommended for the target group at highest risk first, then a few years later expanded the age range.  After that data they expanded to males.  That was essentially a decade from start to end.

Yeah, that makes sense. I guess we're all currently in a Phase 4 trial, lol.