The Vaccine Thread

[Shoeless]

5 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

The UK list is based strictly on preventing death. I believe the first four categories will have been offered vaccination by the middle of February. 

Who is included in group 4 "clinically extremely vulnerable individuals"? 

[Laura Corin]

5 minutes ago, MissLemon said:

Who is included in group 4 "clinically extremely vulnerable individuals"? 

The following plus others decided individually by their own doctors

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by Laura Corin

[Not_a_Number]

7 hours ago, Frances said:

But as we’ve seen, states like WV that didn’t go with the federal government contract with Walgreens and CVS, and instead used small, local pharmacies vaccinated their long term care population much, much faster. What incentive did Walgreens and CVS really have to deliver quickly after they already had the contracts in hand? On the other hand, local pharmacies that already had relationships with these facilities and didn’t want to lose them had every incentive to get it done in a timely manner.
Several of the large chain pharmacies already treat their staff atrociously and put customers at risk for medication errors due to major understaffing in order to squeeze profits. I certainly don’t trust them to bring staffing to adequate levels to handle a rush of people wanting vaccines.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/31/health/pharmacists-medication-errors.html

Plus, the few times my husband and I have had to get shots at pharmacies because our employer didn’t offer them and we didn’t want to go to the doctor just for a shot, the process was anything but efficient. I’m fine with pharmacy chains being one part of the equation, especially for those who want that experience, but I can’t imagine them pulling off anything at the scale and level of organization and efficiency that my local non profit hospital did when they organized massive ongoing clinics (400+ shots per hour) for the two counties in which they operate. Their only real issue has been a lack of steady supply of vaccines.

Yeah, I haven’t been impressed so far.

Are there people who would have done a better job in places that don’t have independent pharmacies? I think NY has been keeping up using state-run sites... what would some other good options be?

[Laura Corin]

46 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Yeah, I haven’t been impressed so far.

Are there people who would have done a better job in places that don’t have independent pharmacies? I think NY has been keeping up using state-run sites... what would some other good options be?

What's the role of primary care physicians in this? They hold the records here and are able to ensure that they vaccinate the most vulnerable. 

[kokotg]

Are other places NOT distributing to CVS, Walgreens, etc? There are a million places you can TRY to get a vaccine here, but it's still like winning the lottery to actually score an appointment anywhere. I managed to get my mother and stepdad appointments (at the health department) because I spend too much time on facebook and saw someone post that were openings and jumped on immediately. There are huge issues with access for seniors who aren't internet savvy and don't have extended family helping them out. My mother's in her late 60s and fairly competent with a computer, and she still had trouble navigating the whole thing. I've heard of people in their 70s and 80s spending all day driving around to various places that distribute vaccines trying to get an appointment. 

Re: teachers. The governor here moved everyone over 65 and first responders into 1a, essentially pushing teachers way down the list. Here most schools ARE open and have been for months, many with no mask mandate. Now there are 2 million people in 1a fighting for around 150,000 doses a week, schools keep shutting down because they have too many sick teachers and no substitutes, and there are dead teachers in the news all the time. I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that 1. I'm happy and relieved that my mom and stepdad got their shots and 2. they can stay home, and my husband can't

[Pawz4me]

14 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

What's the role of primary care physicians in this? They hold the records here and are able to ensure that they vaccinate the most vulnerable. 

Here in my area of NC, so far the vaccines are being administered solely by county health departments and by the large hospital/medical groups. Anyone who is eligible can (try to) get an appointment anywhere--you don't have to be a resident of a particular county to get one at their health department, and you don't have to be a patient of a hospital/medical group to get an appointment with them. Like other places, we've heard that pharmacies will eventually be giving them (I share the same concerns about that that @Francescovered above--I've gotten a flu vaccine at CVS or Walgreen's before and none were very well organized at all). No primary care physicians or specialists, even large cancer centers, have access to the vaccine right now. There are a lot of people here who don't even have a PCP, especially young adults. Neither of our sons currently have a PCP. IMO we're really feeling a huge negative affect of not having a national health care system with vaccine distribution, and especially in prioritizing who gets it. As far as I know the health departments and hospital systems that are administering the vaccine here are going to go on the honor system once it's available to people with risk factors. So a healthy 22 yo could make an appointment, claiming he/she has a high risk condition, and would be given an appointment to get the vaccine w/o proof being required.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Pawz4me

[1234]

My state isn’t using Walgreens and such and is doing a much better job than Nevada, where my MIL is, that is using many different pharmacies. I’m about to lose my mind trying to get her scheduled. She is 80 and I can’t find an appointment anywhere. There are very few places that allow you to schedule via the phone so I’m spending time every day trying online but no luck. The Walgreens site is the absolute worst as it is making me choose a day and then try several different time slots only to be told nothing is available. I have to do that for every day available and then move on to a different pharmacy. It’s maddening!  I do wish they had a system like ours which is more centralized and mainly only through local vaccination clinics.

[ktgrok]

18 hours ago, Laura Corin said:

The way I  heard the vaccine process described - the normal process is like driving through heavy traffic across a big city. This process had a police escort and all the lights on green. The route was just the same, all the junctions were cleared,  but the usual time wasters  - lack of money, corporate and governmental unwillingness to risk putting money into facilities early, etc - were removed.

I heard on the radio that you can think of it as the scientists working as usual, it was the people in business suits that had the speed up. 

10 hours ago, popmom said:

Yes! I love it! Because we’ve all seen the memes about carpool, etc! 😂

I’d say privatize the whole operation. Let chick fil a and fedex bid the job. Who else? Oh, Amazon, of course. Heck—give each of them a contract! They’d straighten this out.

No thank you. Here in Florida our governor is doing a pilot program and tried to give ALL the covid vaccines to one grocery store chain, Publix. No health departments, hospitals, or pharmacies would get any. Just a for profit company that hey, happens to donate a lot of money to the political party the governor belongs to. Biggest issue? Publix is the "nice" grocery store with higher prices and better service, which means it is NOT located in poor neighborhoods, for the most part. At least not in the truly poor, people don't have a bank account or a car or a license type areas. The main example given was Belle Glade, which is a rural, truly underserved area where it isn't unheard of not to have running water or indoor plumbing. Nearest publix would be 45 minutes away, and plenty don't have a car. 

The head of the county health department rightly threw a fit and there was a lot of outrage. So now the county gets "some" reserved amount of vaccine so they can set up pop up clinics, etc in underserved areas. 

But I'm still angry about it. And meanwhile the powers that be probably cannot imagine there are neighborhoods without a Publix - where shopping is a pleasure! (and seriously, it truly is a pleasure - but it is not designed to vaccinate a whole county)

[Dmmetler]

There was an article locally where apparently the medical school students who have learned to give shots are doing most of the injections for the medical district near the school, and will likely be doing some of the shot clinic hours in my city, which will both give them clinical hours and have more people to man the clinics. I would imagine that this might be an option for nursing students as well. Apparently they have also been doing some of the testing sites. 

 

The storage and logistics are why I am really hoping the Johnson and Johnson vaccine is approved soon. It only requires the kind of storage that pharmacies, etc have, and will be easier to do distributed clinics. As it is, it was rather serendipitous that one of the health department clinics and their main offices here were in a former supermarket, because it meant the building already was set up and had the power, etc so they COULD install the super-cold freezers. 

[vonfirmath]

1 hour ago, Pawz4me said:

@Francescovered above--I've gotten a flu vaccine at CVS or Walgreen's before and none were very well organized at all). No primary care physicians or specialists, even large cancer centers, have access to the vaccine right now. There are a lot of people here who don't even have a PCP, especially young adults. Neither of our sons currently have a PCP. IMO we're really feeling a huge negative affect of not having a national health care system with vaccine distribution, and especially in prioritizing who gets it. As far as I know the health departments and hospital systems that are administering the vaccine here are going to go on the honor system once it's available to people with risk factors. So a healthy 22 yo could make an appointment, claiming he/she has a high risk condition, and would be given an appointment to get the vaccine w/o proof being required.

 

Note there is always opposition when people want to ask about health concerns --  an expectation of health privacy that you don't have to answer questions.

Our system of government was always reliant on a people that were generally law-abiding. I'm not sure that assumption is true anymore and this is another breakdown of it.

[vonfirmath]

4 minutes ago, Joker2 said:

My state isn’t using Walgreens and such and is doing a much better job than Nevada, where my MIL is, that is using many different pharmacies. I’m about to lose my mind trying to get her scheduled. She is 80 and I can’t find an appointment anywhere. There are very few places that allow you to schedule via the phone so I’m spending time every day trying online but no luck. The Walgreens site is the absolute worst as it is making me choose a day and then try several different time slots only to be told nothing is available. I have to do that for every day available and then move on to a different pharmacy. It’s maddening!  I do wish they had a system like ours which is more centralized and mainly only through local vaccination clinics.

The reason most of the sign up is online is those hundreds of thousands of people trying to find a very limited amount of shorts. the sites that take phone appointments end up spending ALL their time on the phone even after all the appointment slots are taken instead of giving shots, making medication, or whatever else their normal daily job is supposed to be and people still can't get through when the lines are busy.  Too big a demand for too small a supply.

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by vonfirmath

[Dmmetler]

Oh, and right now shots are only being distributed at three health department sites and at specific workplaces. First hospitals, and now they are starting to focus on other worksites (the school district superintendent is on record as saying that he will not restart schools in person until all his staff have the opportunity to be vaccinated, so it is likely that there will be special clinics just for school district personnel sooner rather than later). Supposedly eventually the hospital systems will be sending it to practices that treat high risk patients, and there will be clinics at Walmarts (which, honestly, if you're going to do a chain, at least that is one that tends to be in middle/lower income areas) and be more accessible than some) and pop up clinics in high need areas. 

 

My endocrinologist told me to get on the cancellations list for the health department since I am only about 10 minutes from the site, and be ready to drop everything and run if I get a text that there is vaccine available, because, honestly, she has no clue when or if high risk people will be able to get vaccinated since they keep pushing more people into 1b/1c, and it seems like the priority is worksites. 

[1234]

3 minutes ago, vonfirmath said:

The reason most of the sign up is online is those hundreds of thousands of people trying to find a very limited amount of shorts. the sites that take phone appointments end up spending ALL their time on the phone even after all the appointment slots are taken instead of giving shots, making medication, or whatever else their normal daily job is supposed to be and people still can't get through when the lines are busy.  Too big a demand for too small a supply.

 

I get it but she is 80 and does absolutely nothing online. She doesn’t even have a smartphone or computer. My state has a three digit number people can call to schedule if they don’t wish to do so online. It just makes more sense when trying to vaccinate a large number of the elderly.

[Laura Corin]

3 minutes ago, vonfirmath said:

The reason most of the sign up is online is those hundreds of thousands of people trying to find a very limited amount of shorts. the sites that take phone appointments end up spending ALL their time on the phone even after all the appointment slots are taken instead of giving shots, making medication, or whatever else their normal daily job is supposed to be and people still can't get through when the lines are busy.  Too big a demand for too small a supply.

 

Yes.  You have many people trying to source a scarce commodity.  We have the scarce commodity being offered selectively dose-by-dose to the people most at risk.  The offer is mostly by post at present, as the cohort is very old and not necessarily able to use a computer or a phone.

[BeachGal]

Here in Illinois, CVS, Walgreen’s, Hy-Vee Pharmacies, Jewel/Osco and Walmart are beginning to offer the vaccines. Some will offer it sooner than others.

https://coronavirus.illinois.gov/s/vaccination-location

The CVS website has done a good job answering frequently asked questions:

https://www.cvs.com/immunizations/covid-19-vaccine

Who will be administering the vaccines at these clinics? Pharmacists? Pharmacy technicians? Other health care providers?

CVS Health immunizers may include pharmacists, pharmacy interns and trained pharmacy technicians, as well as other qualified health care professionals depending on the state's specific regulations. All CVS Health immunizers will be certified according to company regulations, trained in the administration of immunizations and hold an active CPR certification.

Is CVS Health set up to be able to provide appropriate temperature-controlled storage of the vaccine, even if the approved vaccine requires extreme cold storage and cold-chain standards?

Yes, CVS Health is able to appropriately store vaccines at the required temperature range. CVS Health already maintains standard refrigeration and freezing capabilities at every one of our nearly 10,000 CVS Pharmacy locations, and we are putting in place essential logistics to maintain the cold chain, such as transporting vaccines in dry ice packs and ensuring facilities have appropriate freezer capacity.

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by BeachGal

[Dmmetler]

7 minutes ago, vonfirmath said:

 

Note there is always opposition when people want to ask about health concerns --  an expectation of health privacy that you don't have to answer questions.

Our system of government was always reliant on a people that were generally law-abiding. I'm not sure that assumption is true anymore and this is another breakdown of it.

I think that is why the local plan calls for vaccine to be released to practices that serve high risk populations. The idea being that the doctors at the cancer center or endocrinologist or immunologist know who is actually high risk and can prioritize them.

 

Realistically, I have no clue if I qualify because, yes, I have some of the conditions, but except for BMI, they aren't cut and dried. I have athsma, and take daily medications, but am well controlled and rarely need a rescue inhaler. I am borderline diabetic, and have limited pancreatic function, but as long as I am careful about my diet, do not need insulin yet. I teach, and have a license, but am not in a K-12 school. My building is a child Care center among other things, but I don't provide child care (or at least, not for more than an hour or so at a time, since I know some parents use the lesson time to run errands, etc). 

 

I don't want to take a shot from someone who needs it more, but I also really don't want COVID. 

 

 

[Ditto]

Everyone in my house should be group 4.  I spoke to one of my specialists about it when I saw her last week.  She said that their office simply didn't have the man power nor the room to distribute it to even their own patient population.   I know that there is no way I am comfortable with anyone in my home getting it from CVS.  Those buffoons can't even get my prescriptions right, no way am I trusting them to accurately keep and give this vaccine.  

Personally, I am frustrated to no end with this vaccine roll out.  We have managed to, so far, not get Covid.  The anxiety and fear I feel daily over one of us getting it is really unhealthy.  The vaccine is so close and yet so far.  I know it isn't perfect.  I know it doesn't guarantee anything.  But it is all we have right now and I want my family to have it.   When I hear of those jumping line and receiving it, it just makes my blood boil 

Thank you for coming to today's rant.

[popmom]

2 hours ago, ktgrok said:

 

No thank you. Here in Florida our governor is doing a pilot program and tried to give ALL the covid vaccines to one grocery store chain, Publix. No health departments, hospitals, or pharmacies would get any. Just a for profit company that hey, happens to donate a lot of money to the political party the governor belongs to. Biggest issue? Publix is the "nice" grocery store with higher prices and better service, which means it is NOT located in poor neighborhoods, for the most part. At least not in the truly poor, people don't have a bank account or a car or a license type areas. The main example given was Belle Glade, which is a rural, truly underserved area where it isn't unheard of not to have running water or indoor plumbing. Nearest publix would be 45 minutes away, and plenty don't have a car. 

The head of the county health department rightly threw a fit and there was a lot of outrage. So now the county gets "some" reserved amount of vaccine so they can set up pop up clinics, etc in underserved areas. 

But I'm still angry about it. And meanwhile the powers that be probably cannot imagine there are neighborhoods without a Publix - where shopping is a pleasure! (and seriously, it truly is a pleasure - but it is not designed to vaccinate a whole county)

Then I think you actually agree with me. We’re on the same page. Whether it’s Publix or Walgreens or any other big chain. That was my point. They aren’t cut out for this. The logistical expertise is in the companies I listed. And they (Amazon Fedex) have a presence everywhere—rural, poor, everywhere. Amazon has already expressed interest in helping with this.

[Jenny in Florida]

So, presumably because of the breast cancer (?), I have been determined to be higher risk and was offered an appointment for my first shot of the Moderna vaccine tomorrow afternoon.

I'll admit to some nervousness, just because I always seem to be the one who experiences odd/unpleasant reactions to medications, but I'm going.

Will report once I  see how it goes,

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, popmom said:

Then I think you actually agree with me. We’re on the same page. Whether it’s Publix or Walgreens or any other big chain. That was my point. They aren’t cut out for this. The logistical expertise is in the companies I listed. And they (Amazon Fedex) have a presence everywhere—rural, poor, everywhere. Amazon has already expressed interest in helping with this.

I'm thrilled at them offering to help, but I don't want things totally handed off to a for profit company to control. 

[1234]

I made my MIL an appointment! A place I had been checking suddenly had two available and the first one disappeared by the time I hit submit but I was able to snag the second. I feel like I won the lottery for her just to get a vaccine at a grocery store. It shouldn’t be this hard!

[kokotg]

I got my mother and stepfather scheduled for their second doses next week. They have to go to a place 40 minutes south of where they got their first doses, because there are no appointments available at the same place. Which means I have to drive them, because they won't do long interstate drives. I continue to be unimpressed about how hard this must be for seniors who don't have anyone to help them navigate. I'm sure my mom's not the only over 65 year old uncomfortable driving 40 minutes on the interstate through Atlanta. But a week from tomorrow they'll be all vaccinated! My Dad works at a nursing home, so he's already had his, as has my grandmother who lives in an assisted living place. And my FIL in CA just got his first dose and my MIL has her appointment later this week. All my old people are getting vaccinated!

[JennyD]

Encouraging update from Israel. 

 

[ScoutTN]

17 hours ago, popmom said:

See I actually don’t think they will be any better. They haven’t been with testing. What do you mean they have what it takes to do the job? Who will fill my prescriptions if all the pharmacists are giving shots? Are they actively recruiting right now? Who knows? 

CVS had been very good with testing here, once the ball got rolling. Organized, not a long wait, results in a day or two. 

[popmom]

3 hours ago, ktgrok said:

I'm thrilled at them offering to help, but I don't want things totally handed off to a for profit company to control. 

Well, "totally handed off" is not how it works with government contractors. I've seen the success--vastly superior success--of the government contracting out in the defense industry. If our military wants a "hit-to-kill technology, extended range air defense" missile, they go to the private ((for profit)) sector because that's where the expertise is. The private sector is motivated by competition therefore much more efficient than the government, and better qualified/recruits the best of the best. (My dh is a former rocket scientist and my grandfather worked for NASA/space shuttle. 🙂 )

We are definitely not on the same page if you think private sector involvement or for profit companies are somehow inherently bad or detrimental to society.

Ok, so dh wasn't exactly a rocket scientist. He is an engineer who worked on missile design and testing. And his official title at that time was "scientist" so I joke with him about it. 🙂

Edited February 1, 2021 by popmom

[ktgrok]

16 minutes ago, popmom said:

Well, "totally handed off" is not how it works with government contractors. I've seen the success--vastly superior success--of the government contracting out in the defense industry. If our military wants a "hit-to-kill technology, extended range air defense" missile, they go to the private ((for profit)) sector because that's where the expertise is. The private sector is motivated by competition therefore much more efficient than the government, and better qualified/recruits the best of the best. (My dh is a former rocket scientist and my grandfather worked for NASA/space shuttle. 🙂 )

We are definitely not on the same page if you think private sector involvement or for profit companies are somehow evil or detrimental to society.

Ok, so dh wasn't exactly a rocket scientist. He is an engineer who worked on missile design and testing. And his official title at that time was "scientist" so I joke with him about it. 🙂

My issue is mostly with health care, where there is an overriding motive for society beyond profit. The private sector can provide excellent results when they have a single client, like the military. If the people buying it, the military, are not happy, that private company will feel reprucussions, so they have to satisfy. 

But when the "client" is every human in the country, including the poor who will never actually buy anything from that company, and who will be a strain on resources, and who will have zero say in any repercussions, I don't like it. At least if the government is supervising I can vote that person out if I don't like them (or try). So yeah, if the health departmnt is in charge, and using outside consulting, I agree, good idea. If as was going to be the case here in Florida, a for profit company go to handle everything about vaccine roll out - with zero control or oversight by the health department, no, not okay with that. I'm okay with the health department using Publix or Amazon or Chik Fil A for that matter. I'm NOT okay with the health department and hospitals totally cut out of the entire thing and Publix having carte blanche which was the original agreement. 

[popmom]

46 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

My issue is mostly with health care, where there is an overriding motive for society beyond profit. The private sector can provide excellent results when they have a single client, like the military. If the people buying it, the military, are not happy, that private company will feel reprucussions, so they have to satisfy. 

But when the "client" is every human in the country, including the poor who will never actually buy anything from that company, and who will be a strain on resources, and who will have zero say in any repercussions, I don't like it. At least if the government is supervising I can vote that person out if I don't like them (or try). So yeah, if the health departmnt is in charge, and using outside consulting, I agree, good idea. If as was going to be the case here in Florida, a for profit company go to handle everything about vaccine roll out - with zero control or oversight by the health department, no, not okay with that. I'm okay with the health department using Publix or Amazon or Chik Fil A for that matter. I'm NOT okay with the health department and hospitals totally cut out of the entire thing and Publix having carte blanche which was the original agreement. 

I would say that the "client" would still be a branch of the government--not the citizens.  So the government entities would never be cut out entirely because the gov is footing the bill, laying out the requirements and stipulations, etc --just like it is when the military enters into a contract.  The Publix situation sounds like a failing on FL government's part regarding that "original agreement". Not a FL problem per se. Could happen in any state. 

It makes for interesting brainstorming but not anything more. Nothing I can do to change anything sadly. 

Maybe we need the military to get involved. I imagine that ship has sailed since it has all been delegated to the states. 

ETA I don't fully understand how the vaccines are being distributed in my state. It appears that any pharmacy or HCP can sign up to become a vaccine provider. Then it's up to each individual provider to order their own supply through "VaccineFinder"?? That seems odd. I'll have to do more digging.

Edited February 2, 2021 by popmom

[popmom]

When the CDC says that jurisdictions can place an order for doses against their (each jurisdiction's) weekly allocation, who is doing the ordering? Individual providers? State dept of health? I'm trying to figure out how the supply chain works in my state. 

[Shoeless]

I heard on the daily Covid briefing that San Antonio will be partnering with Meals on Wheels and the Fire Department to get vaccines to homebound seniors.  I had been wondering how that group of people would get vaccinated, so I am very relieved to hear there is a plan in place. 

Also, I am going to try to get a vaccine appointment for DH for this week.  I want to try to get an appointment for his grandpa, too, but DH is worried that the stress of scheduling the 1st and 2nd appointments at a drive thru clinic might be too much on grandpa.  He thinks grandpa might handle it better if the appointment was in a regular pharmacy or grocery store. I can see his point, and agree that in a perfect world, a quick trip to the pharmacy would be much better. But this isn't a perfect world right now. 😕  I'm going to suggest DH call grandpa and see if he wants me to try to sign him up. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by MissLemon

[Not_a_Number]

1 hour ago, popmom said:

Maybe we need the military to get involved. I imagine that ship has sailed since it has all been delegated to the states. 

Apparently, that's what New Zealand did for their quarantine hotels. Honestly, that makes sense -- they have logistics experience. 

I think that would have been a good plan, since it would have been more coordinated, and they probably know how to do this. 

[mommyoffive]

This is good news.

Pfizer plans to deliver 200 million doses of Covid vaccine to U.S. by May, sooner than expected (msn.com)

[mommyoffive]

Fauci on if pregnant women should get the vaccine

Dr. Fauci Just Said It's Now Safe for These People to Get Vaccinated (msn.com)

[Kanin]

My MIL has started sending me chain emails about covid vaccine reactions. Previously she was just including DH and his siblings, but now I'm on the list, too 😕 

[Kassia]

My MIL is getting her first dose tomorrow.  I know she will want to see us (and others) more frequently once she is fully vaccinated.  How much of a risk do you think that is to us and her?  

I am relieved she's getting the shot, but have been enjoying the good excuse to hardly see her this past year.  We have always had a difficult relationship, but my FIL passed away last summer and now that she's alone she wants us to be more connected (only lives ten minutes away) and she frequently needs DH's help.  

[Ausmumof3]

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2A21UG?__twitter_impression=true
 

Sputnik V is 92 pc effective according to large phase 3 trial results published in the Lancet.

[wathe]

My local public health unit is quoting very reassuring numbers regarding efficacy after just the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine:

Up to 92% fourteen days after the first dose.

Based on data from England and Quebec.

They go on to argue that the 52% efficacy quoted in the original NEJM paper is too low, because they counted all cases of covid post first dose of vaccine starting immediately - so cases acquired within hours or days of vaccination were counted, even though it is not reasonable to expect that vaccine would provide protection so quickly.  Also, some of those early cases may have been acquired pre-vaccination, but not detected until post vaccination.

So that's some good news.

Edited February 2, 2021 by wathe

[Kassia]

This was just announced:

https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/vaccine/walgreens-vaccination-ohio-nursing-homes-erronously-administered-coronavirus/95-7dc7ef05-dbaa-496e-aa7f-a064c83273b5?fbclid=IwAR2bbfSDxjLFKKSy4qH3-W4BjpJ30T71XwD2127CkkXqnqxiu6YT_TK6h2s

 

 some of the doses given by Walgreens to patients at five Northeast Ohio long-term care facilities were not properly stored. 

 

 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Kassia

[Drama Llama]

17 minutes ago, Kassia said:

My MIL is getting her first dose tomorrow.  I know she will want to see us (and others) more frequently once she is fully vaccinated.  How much of a risk do you think that is to us and her?  

I am relieved she's getting the shot, but have been enjoying the good excuse to hardly see her this past year.  We have always had a difficult relationship, but my FIL passed away last summer and now that she's alone she wants us to be more connected (only lives ten minutes away) and she frequently needs DH's help.  

My understanding is that once she has the second dose, and has had time for it to become effective, she'll be in very little danger from you. 

As far as you from her, it seems like the evidence is that, at a minimum, she'll be less likely to contract the virus, and that since spread is increased by symptoms, she'll be less likely to spread if she hasn't since she probably won't be coughing or sneezing as much.  

 

[Kassia]

1 minute ago, BaseballandHockey said:

My understanding is that once she has the second dose, and has had time for it to become effective, she'll be in very little danger from you. 

As far as you from her, it seems like the evidence is that, at a minimum, she'll be less likely to contract the virus, and that since spread is increased by symptoms, she'll be less likely to spread if she hasn't since she probably won't be coughing or sneezing as much.  

 

Well, darn, Covid has been the perfect excuse not to see her!  😛

[Drama Llama]

2 minutes ago, Kassia said:

Well, darn, Covid has been the perfect excuse not to see her!  😛

I can so relate, except in my case it's my mom.  

Less likely doesn't mean she can't spread.  You could decide it's still not worth the risk.   

[popmom]

22 minutes ago, wathe said:

My local public health unit is quoting very reassuring numbers regarding efficacy after just the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine:

Up to 92% fourteen days after the first dose.

Based on data from England and Quebec.

They go on to argue that the 52% efficacy quoted in the original NEJM paper is too low, because they counted all cases of covid post first dose of vaccine starting immediately - so cases acquired within hours or days of vaccination were counted, even though it is not reasonable to expect that vaccine would provide protection so quickly.  Also, some of those early cases may have been acquired pre-vaccination, but not detected until post vaccination.

So that's some good news.

This could be a game changer. If this continues to verify, we could use all the vaccines allocated for second doses to get more people vaccinated. You think there's any chance that could happen?

Edited February 2, 2021 by popmom

[wathe]

13 minutes ago, popmom said:

This could be a game changer. If this continues to verify, we could use all the vaccines allocated for second doses to get more people vaccinated. You think there's any chance that could happen?

I think only time will tell.

General vaccine history suggests that a booster dose will be neccessary to achieve full and lasting immunity.

Several juristdictions are stretching the interval between the first and second dose (mine included), so that they can get more first doses into arms, stat.  And not setting aside dose two - so the timing of a second dose depends on vaccine supply at the time your second dose is due.

[Corraleno]

1 hour ago, wathe said:

My local public health unit is quoting very reassuring numbers regarding efficacy after just the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine:

Up to 92% fourteen days after the first dose.

Based on data from England and Quebec.

They go on to argue that the 52% efficacy quoted in the original NEJM paper is too low, because they counted all cases of covid post first dose of vaccine starting immediately - so cases acquired within hours or days of vaccination were counted, even though it is not reasonable to expect that vaccine would provide protection so quickly.  Also, some of those early cases may have been acquired pre-vaccination, but not detected until post vaccination.

So that's some good news.

If true, that means the first dose of Pfizer is significantly more effective that the "one dose" J&J vaccine.

I bet the numbers for the 2-dose version of J&J will be closer to the other 2-dose vaccines, and calling it a "1 dose" vaccine is really a marketing move. It still has advantages in terms of storage, but I really don't think it's fair to call it a one-dose vaccine when the reported efficacy of 66% is vastly lower than just the first shot of a 2-dose vaccine.

[wathe]

1 minute ago, Corraleno said:

If true, that means the first dose of Pfizer is significantly more effective that the "one dose" J&J vaccine.

I bet the numbers for the 2-dose version of J&J will be closer to the other 2-dose vaccines, and calling it a "1 dose" vaccine is really a marketing move. It still has advantages in terms of storage, but I really don't think it's fair to call it a one-dose vaccine when the reported efficacy of 66% is vastly lower than just the first shot of a 2-dose vaccine.

I wonder if the J&J data have the same flaw of counting all covid cases post-dose, even those that presented within hours or days, before immunity could plausibly be established.  Just musing.  Anyone know where the J&J data are published?

[vonfirmath]

5 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

If true, that means the first dose of Pfizer is significantly more effective that the "one dose" J&J vaccine.

I bet the numbers for the 2-dose version of J&J will be closer to the other 2-dose vaccines, and calling it a "1 dose" vaccine is really a marketing move. It still has advantages in terms of storage, but I really don't think it's fair to call it a one-dose vaccine when the reported efficacy of 66% is vastly lower than just the first shot of a 2-dose vaccine.

When all this started, 66% would have been considered a fantastic success

I have learned through this that most of the flu vaccines we take every year are only about 50% effective!

 

(And J&J's usefulness extends far beyond it being a 1 dose vaccine. It also doesn't have the strenuous storage and use requirements of the other vaccines)

Edited February 2, 2021 by vonfirmath

[Laura Corin]

News on the possible efficacy of single vaccines  and wider spacing with the Oxford vaccine, plus cutting spread 

BBC News - Oxford vaccine could substantially cut spread
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55910964

[Corraleno]

9 minutes ago, wathe said:

I wonder if the J&J data have the same flaw of counting all covid cases post-dose, even those that presented within hours or days, before immunity could plausibly be established.  Just musing.  Anyone know where the J&J data are published?

I don't think they've published their data yet, here is their press release from 1/29 announcing results:

 https://www.jnj.com/johnson-johnson-announces-single-shot-janssen-covid-19-vaccine-candidate-met-primary-endpoints-in-interim-analysis-of-its-phase-3-ensemble-trial

[Corraleno]

5 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

News on the possible efficacy of single vaccines  and wider spacing with the Oxford vaccine, plus cutting spread 

BBC News - Oxford vaccine could substantially cut spread
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55910964

That's very encouraging! If I am reading that right, the vaccine was 76% effective against even testing positive after the first dose. And the Oxford/AZ vaccine is cheap ($4/shot) and does not require unusual storage conditions. 

 

 

[Corraleno]

2 hours ago, vonfirmath said:

When all this started, 66% would have been considered a fantastic success

I have learned through this that most of the flu vaccines we take every year are only about 50% effective!

 

(And J&J's usefulness extends far beyond it being a 1 dose vaccine. It also doesn't have the strenuous storage and use requirements of the other vaccines)

Covid is much more deadly than the flu, and now that we have multiple vaccines with efficacy rates in the mid to high 90s, 66% looks pretty weak. There are other vaccines that also do not require unusual storage conditions and are more effective than J&J. The main advantage J&J offered was the idea of a one-shot vaccine, but it seems like the first dose of every other vaccine so far is more effective than J&J's one-&-done.

And their 66% efficacy rate is not protection against catching covid, it's protection against "moderate to severe" disease, which means that some unknown percentage of the 66% tested postive but only had mild cases. So more than a third of those vaccinated with J&J caught covid and could theoretically transmit it to others. According to Oxford's most recent data, only 24% of the those who had the first dose of the Oxford/AZ vaccine even tested positive. J&J is also only 85% effective against "severe" disease. 

I'll be interested in seeing their data if/when they publish it, but so far it seems like J&J is significantly weaker than the other major vaccine candidates. They do have a 2-dose trial going on, which seems to have started much later than the 1-dose trial, which makes me wonder if they saw that the preliminary data from the 1-dose trial was rather weak and decided to see if 2-doses would bring their efficacy rates closer to the other vaccines.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Corraleno
bad math brain

[wathe]

1 minute ago, Corraleno said:

 

And their 66% efficacy rate is not protection against catching covid, it's protection against "moderate to severe" disease, which means that some unknown percentage of the 66% tested postive but only had mild cases. So more than 45% of those vaccinated with J&J caught covid and could theoretically transmit it to others. According to Oxford's most recent data, only 24% of the those who had the first dose of the Oxford/AZ vaccine even tested positive. J&J is also only 85% effective against "severe" disease, which means that 1 in 7 people vaccinated with J&J experienced severe disease. 

I'll be interested in seeing their data if/when they publish it, but so far it seems like J&J is significantly weaker than the other major vaccine candidates. They do have a 2-dose trial going on, which seems to have started much later than the 1-dose trial, which makes me wonder if they saw that the preliminary data from the 1-dose trial was rather weak and decided to see if 2-doses would bring their efficacy rates closer to the other vaccines.

I want to see the data too.  I suspect that 66% and 85% are relative risk reduction numbers rather than absolute:  I don't think 1 in 7 vaccinated with J&J experienced severe disease  - that's not any better than in the unvaccinated population, where the numbers for severe disease are something like 15% of cases.   I think it's more likely that of those who got covid post vax, those who were vaccinated with J&J vaccine were 85% less likely to experience severe disease than those who were not vaccinated.  The absolute numbers and the methodology details will be really important to interpret the data properly.