Vaccine hesitancy and side effects

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Syllieann said:

The way you are guessing at your chances of covid are very different from a lot of us.  I already had my second dose, but if I hadn't and cases or variants surged it would not be difficult at all for us to isolate.  My entire extended family is already vaccinated or already recovered from infection except for two people whom I see infrequently.  Those two have spouses who were infected so I would assume they have some antibodies.  We are homebodies to begin with so we are pretty ok with few play dates.  The kids my kids are closest to have already had covid.  I don't need to go in elevators, to the park, or on public transportation.  So in my case the chance of covid is much smaller.  My 12 yo, for example, will probably not be vaccinated as soon as it becomes available.  They reward is too small to overcome the unknowns.

If you aren't seeing anyone and you aren't going indoors for long periods and you don't want to take classes, then I can see how your risk assessment is different from mine. Everyone should obviously figure out their own risk of getting COVID if they don't get vaccinated...

[SpecialClassical]

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

In his situation, I'd probably explain that he has a medical reason -- I imagine this is hard on his employer, too, since they are anxious for everything to be "normal." But that sounds like an unpleasant situation 😞 . 

He works for a Fortune 500 company and they are doing quite well. His position will be at home for some time and doesn’t need to be in person.  He regularly conferences with people around the world via technology.  I have encouraged him to send a generic email stating his pro-vaccine stance. 

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, mjbucks1 said:

I also look at it as the majority (78%) who have been hospitalized or died have been overweight or obese.

I mean, 70% of the US is overweight or obese, I think 😉 . So you'd expect that even without selection effects. 

 

3 minutes ago, mjbucks1 said:

The majority have also been over 65.  I know so many people who have had it (including people in their 80's), and only two were hospitalized.

How many people do you know who've had it? I know a number but not a ton. The one who died was in his 90s. 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, SpecialClassical said:

He works for a Fortune 500 company and they are doing quite well. His position will be at home for some time and doesn’t need to be in person.  He regularly conferences with people around the world via technology.  I have encouraged him to send a generic email stating his pro-vaccine stance. 

Ugh. It's annoying that they are pressuring him, then. 

[mjbucks1]

7 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

How many people do you know who've had it? I know a number but not a ton. The one who died was in his 90s. 

Right off the top of my head I counted 55.  I am sure I am missing several.  Maybe that is not a ton, but it is quite a few.  Several of those were over 70 as well.

[Not_a_Number]

11 minutes ago, mjbucks1 said:

Right off the top of my head I counted 55.  I am sure I am missing several.  Maybe that is not a ton, but it is quite a few.  Several of those were over 70 as well.

If you know 2 people out of 55 who were hospitalized, that sounds relatively representative, I think. Hospitalization rates are in the single percent somewhere.

[Roadrunner]

I just try to see the endgame here without the vaccine and I can’t. 
All of my kids’ activities have been on hold, which effectively put us into complete social isolation. After a year of this, we need to be out. Music kids haven’t been able to play a concert or rehearse with others in a year. At some point, isolation needs to end. 
And the lockdowns won’t end until we stop showing up at hospitals. So far we haven’t been able to do that on our own. I really don’t want to relive the last winter in CA with ICUs overflowing and hospitals full. And my kids don’t want to see another Zoom. 
I am high risk, so I went and got the vaccine the first opportunity I had. I am hoping I took myself out of potential hospital trip. And I think that’s the goal. We aren’t locked down because we are getting sick. We are locked down because more than acceptable number are getting too sick and threatening the collapse of the medical system. 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Roadrunner said:

I just try to see the endgame here without the vaccine and I can’t. 
All of my kids’ activities have been on hold, which effectively put us into complete social isolation. After a year of this, we need to be out. Music kids haven’t been able to play a concert or rehearse with others in a year. At some point, isolation needs to end. 
And the lockdowns won’t end until we stop showing up at hospitals. So far we haven’t been able to do that on our own. I really don’t want to relive the last winter in CA with ICUs overflowing and hospitals full. And my kids don’t want to see another Zoom. 
I am high risk, so I went and got the vaccine the first opportunity I had. I am hoping I took myself out of potential hospital trip. And I think that’s the goal. We aren’t locked down because we are getting sick. We are locked down because more than acceptable number are getting too sick and threatening the collapse of the medical system. 

I don’t even see an endgame with the vaccine 😕 . It looks to me like some pockets of the country will not be able to get herd immunity since there is so much hesitancy. So then the virus will keep mutating. I guess in a generation or two, it’ll probably become less deadly, but in the meantime, I figure it’ll just mutate to escape immunity.

So I’m currently crossing my fingers the vaccine lasts a few years so we don’t have to constantly get shots, and I’m hoping for more clarity about sequelae in kids.

[Roadrunner]

Just now, Not_a_Number said:

I don’t even see an endgame with the vaccine 😕 . It looks to me like some pockets of the country will not be able to get herd immunity since there is so much hesitancy. So then the virus will keep mutating. I guess in a generation or two, it’ll probably become less deadly, but in the meantime, I figure it’ll just mutate to escape immunity.

So I’m currently crossing my fingers the vaccine lasts a few years so we don’t have to constantly get shots, and I’m hoping for more clarity about sequelae in kids.

Well just Watched Moderna CEO last night and he says boosters in the Fall. He says his company hopes to have a yearly booster that includes flu. 
https://finance.yahoo.com/video/moderna-ceo-going-boosters-starting-163458213.html

I think as long as the infection is in pockets, we are OK. As long as medical system doesn’t crumble because of it, we are OK. 

I also think for high risk activities like orchestra or other large indoor venues, vaccine proofs might be required to enter. I would rather do that then silence music. This pandemic has devastated arts. Hope is to find a way forward. I am desperately grasping at any hope. 
 

[Faith-manor]

5 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

Well just Watched Moderna CEO last night and he says boosters in the Fall. He says his company hopes to have a yearly booster that includes flu. 
https://finance.yahoo.com/video/moderna-ceo-going-boosters-starting-163458213.html

I think as long as the infection is in pockets, we are OK. As long as medical system doesn’t crumble because of it, we are OK. 

I also think for high risk activities like orchestra or other large indoor venues, vaccine proofs might be required to enter. I would rather do that then silence music. This pandemic has devastated arts. Hope is to find a way forward. I am desperately grasping at any hope. 
 

This. My job as director of a community fine arts program is toast. I am totally down with private programs requiring proof of vaccine for participation and attendance, and then getting back to business.

[mjbucks1]

10 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

If you know 2 people out of 55 who were hospitalized, that sounds relatively representative, I think. Hospitalization rates are in the single percent somewhere.

Yes, and both of those people had underlying health conditions (40% of people with underlying health conditions have been hospitalized with Covid).  I do not know anyone that is healthy that has been hospitalized.  Although several on my list do have pre-existing conditions that I thought for certain would mean they would be hospitalized, and they were not hospitalized.  One didn't even know he had it.  He had to be screened because he had to have a heart procedure, and he had it without knowing it! 

[AbcdeDooDah]

18 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I don’t even see an endgame with the vaccine 😕 . It looks to me like some pockets of the country will not be able to get herd immunity since there is so much hesitancy. So then the virus will keep mutating. I guess in a generation or two, it’ll probably become less deadly, but in the meantime, I figure it’ll just mutate to escape immunity.

So I’m currently crossing my fingers the vaccine lasts a few years so we don’t have to constantly get shots, and I’m hoping for more clarity about sequelae in kids.

If those same pockets had Covid already, like someone upthread mentioned, how does that not contribute to herd immunity? 

[Not_a_Number]

4 minutes ago, mjbucks1 said:

Yes, and both of those people had underlying health conditions (40% of people with underlying health conditions have been hospitalized with Covid).  I do not know anyone that is healthy that has been hospitalized.  Although several on my list do have pre-existing conditions that I thought for certain would mean they would be hospitalized, and they were not hospitalized.  One didn't even know he had it.  He had to be screened because he had to have a heart procedure, and he had it without knowing it! 

Yeah, it’s a very random disease. You can’t predict exactly how someone will do or if they’ll be asymptomatic.

With a 3% chance of hospitalization, you’d expect most people one knows to not be hospitalized. And it looks like that’s what you’re seeing.

[Roadrunner]

2 minutes ago, mjbucks1 said:

Yes, and both of those people had underlying health conditions (40% of people with underlying health conditions have been hospitalized with Covid).  I do not know anyone that is healthy that has been hospitalized.  Although several on my list do have pre-existing conditions that I thought for certain would mean they would be hospitalized, and they were not hospitalized.  One didn't even know he had it.  He had to be screened because he had to have a heart procedure, and he had it without knowing it! 

We really need to say these stats loudly because I can tell you in my family people’s ability to risk assess is not there. My 60+ relative with two underlying health conditions was hesitant because the morbidity of the virus is 1% as she put it. I mean if somebody would phrase it to her that she had 40% chance of being in the hospital, maybe should would have been less hesitant. 
I don’t mean to scare people, but we need to start articulating more clearly to high risk population.

A young kid with underlying health conditions just died from Covid in Hawaii. The risks are huge for some people. 

[Not_a_Number]

5 minutes ago, AbcdeDooDah said:

If those same pockets had Covid already, like someone upthread mentioned, how does that not contribute to herd immunity? 

 

My impression is that immune response to actual infection is actually less reliable and is less likely to actually consistently push reproduction numbers under 1. So the virus will keep mutating.

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

We really need to say these stats loudly because I can tell you in my family people’s ability to risk assess is not there. My 60+ relative with two underlying health conditions was hesitant because the morbidity of the virus is 1% as she put it. I mean if somebody would phrase it to her that she had 40% chance of being in the hospital, maybe should would have been less hesitant. 
I don’t mean to scare people, but we need to start articulating more clearly to high risk population.

A young kid with underlying health conditions just died from Covid in Hawaii. The risks are huge for some people. 

I don’t think it’s true that 40% of any group gets hospitalized. Maybe 40% of the hospitalized have underlying conditions??? But that number scans as wildly off to me in the current formulation.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Not_a_Number

[Not_a_Number]

8 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

 

My impression is that immune response to actual infection is actually less reliable and is less likely to actually consistently push reproduction numbers under 1. So the virus will keep mutating.

Checking this: it looks like we do have evidence of robust immune memory, just not antibodies.

Any idea what that would mean? If someone has T-cells but not antibodies, do they still get infected?

[Roadrunner]

7 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I don’t think it’s true that 40% of any group gets hospitalized. Maybe 40% of the hospitalized have underlying conditions??? But that number scans as wildly off to me in the current formulation.

I would love to see the stats on what % of those who are obese or diabetic or high blood pressure or many other underlying conditions who get a virus end up hospitalized preferably by age group. I am going to guess that that severe Covid and mortality rates look very, very different for those groups than for healthy people. 

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

I would love to see the stats on what % of those who are obese or diabetic or high blood pressure or many other underlying conditions who get a virus end up hospitalized preferably by age group. I am going to guess that that severe Covid and mortality rates look very, very different for those groups than for healthy people. 

Yes, it looks different, but it’s not 40%.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, Plum said:

At a Glance

• A study estimated that nearly two-thirds of COVID-19 hospitalizations in the U.S. could be attributed to obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and heart failure.

The researchers estimated that more than 900,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations occurred through November 2020. Based on their model, 30% of these hospitalizations were attributable to obesity, 26% to hypertension, 21% to diabetes, and 12% to heart failure. These people would still have been infected with COVID-19, but likely would not have been sick enough to need hospitalization.

More than one of these conditions are often present in the same person. The model also estimated hospitalizations due to different combinations. The numbers weren’t simply additive. In total, 64% of the hospitalizations might have been prevented if not for the four conditions.

The model suggested that COVID-19 hospitalizations due to these conditions varied by age. Older adults with diabetes, heart failure, or hypertension were more likely to be hospitalized than younger people with the same condition. However, obesity affected COVID-19 hospitalization risk similarly across age groups. 

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/most-covid-19-hospitalizations-due-four-conditions

Those aren’t the right percentages, are they? That’s not the chance of being hospitalized by group...

[Not_a_Number]

@Roadrunner: I found this yesterday. Dunno how reliable it is, but it looks ok.

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

[wathe]

10 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

I think our best bet is people who are high risk will keep getting vaccinated so the hospitalization and mortality rates fall. That’s the key. If the rest of the population wants to get immunity through the infection, we can’t do anything about it. I have long given up on herd immunity. At this point I just hope for steady numbers. 
 

This strategy literally isn't working here.    We are in the middle of a third wave, driven by younger, healthier people,  that is stressing hospitals to the max (record numbers of transfers, record numbers of ICU admissions, improvised ICU's, parking-lot wards in tents, one Toronto hospital diverting and transferring out yesterday because they are running out of oxygen.  Our highest risk people are vaccinated (long term care, organ transplants, elderly, among others) and they aren't the ones getting sick.   Our hospitals and ICU's are spilling over with 40 and 50 year olds.  It's a combination on variants and just sheer numbers.

40 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

I just try to see the endgame here without the vaccine and I can’t. 

....(snip)....

We aren’t locked down because we are getting sick. We are locked down because more than acceptable number are getting too sick and threatening the collapse of the medical system. 

Exactly this.

[Roadrunner]

5 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

@Roadrunner: I found this yesterday. Dunno how reliable it is, but it looks ok.

https://riskcalc.org/COVID19Hospitalization/

Very cool!

[Roadrunner]

I am very hopeful by just looking at the Israeli data. 
We are also in CA, and I check daily what had been happening here - vaccination percentages have been steadily increasing still by about 0.3% of the population daily. Number of new infections have stabilized. 

[SoCal_Bear]

For those in CA, this is an interactive map that shows vax by zip code. 

https://dig.abclocal.go.com/kabc/ca-vaccine-tracker/SoCal_vax_zip_map.html

 

 

 

[bluemongoose]

What is the risk calculator telling you? Risk of what? Death? Hospitalization? I punched in my info and got 3.9%. Sorry if this is obvious and I am missing it. My brain is fuzzy today and I haven't found my glasses yet. Lol. 

[AbcdeDooDah]

1 minute ago, bluemongoose said:

What is the risk calculator telling you? Risk of what? Death? Hospitalization? I punched in my info and got 3.9%. Sorry if this is obvious and I am missing it. My brain is fuzzy today and I haven't found my glasses yet. Lol. 

Hospitalization risk

[Not_a_Number]

27 minutes ago, Plum said:

I don’t know what you mean. This is from NIH and dated March 9, 2021. 

I mean, that’s not “the chance you’ll be hospitalized if you have underlying conditions.” Those percentages are something else.

[wathe]

Looking at COVID mortality stats by age group can misleading, I think, because so much has changed over time.

It's definitely true that early in the pandemic, the vast, vast majority of deaths were in the very elderly.  Because their risk is higher at baseline, and because nursing home overwhelm itself contributed to excess deaths in that age group.

But, now things have very much changed here.  The very elderly (80+) are vaxed, and relatively  few are getting sick.  Fewer than half of recent covid deaths in the province are in this age group in the last few weeks (compared to this group comprising 80 to 90% of deaths early in the pandemic.)

The mortality rate for young people here is going to increase, because both because of deadlier variants, and because of hospital overwhelm.  We aren't officially in triaging/rationing ICU care here yet, but I can tell you that on the ground, hospital overwhelm is causing changes in who gets admitted and who gets sent home.

[Not_a_Number]

5 minutes ago, wathe said:

The mortality rate for young people here is going to increase, because both because of deadlier variants, and because of hospital overwhelm. 

So, variants aside (I don't know how much deadlier they are, although I'm curious), you'd expect similar mortality rates to NYC last year, no? It's not like older people being vaccinated means that younger people are worse off. 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, Plum said:

Oh. No, it’s not. It’s what underlying conditions they found the most in hospitalized patients which is an actual number, not a hypothetical “what are your chances?” I don’t see how accurate chances are by individual. It’s fine for identifying a group, but I wouldn’t rely on it to determine my own personal situation. That would be better discussed with a doctor. 

Obviously one's own chances are at best an estimate, given how random the disease is. Just a ballpark figure to help one think about one's risks. 

[wathe]

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

So, variants aside (I don't know how much deadlier they are, although I'm curious), you'd expect similar mortality rates to NYC last year, no? It's not like older people being vaccinated means that younger people are worse off. 

Yes and no. 

We didn't have a New York-like first wave here, so Canadian data will change.

I think younger people actually are worse off because of the sheer volumes of them.  We are overwhelmed with younger people, and going to have to triage/ration care among younger people.  Young and otherwise healthy people who would have previously have been chosen for the bed in a triage situation will now be competing with similarly "young and healthy" others.

The variants are certainly more contagious, and hence at the very least they indirectly more deadly - they've pushed us into an overwhelm situation. 

[Not_a_Number]

6 minutes ago, wathe said:

Yes and no. 

We didn't have a New York-like first wave here, so Canadian data will change.

I think younger people actually are worse off because of the sheer volumes of them.  We are overwhelmed with younger people, and going to have to triage/ration care among younger people.  Young and otherwise healthy people who would have previously have been chosen for the bed in a triage situation will now be competing with similarly "young and healthy" others.

The variants are certainly more contagious, and hence at the very least they indirectly more deadly - they've pushed us into an overwhelm situation. 

But I'd assume having LESS competition for hospital beds than in the NY wave is a good thing, overall? Plus, I assume there's at least a bit more institutional knowledge. 

[kokotg]

2 hours ago, mjbucks1 said:

 

I also look at it as the majority (78%) who have been hospitalized or died have been overweight or obese.  

Important note re: this is that 69% of American adults are overweight or obese. It would be considerably more surprising if it WEREN'T true that the majority who have been hospitalized and died were overweight. Particularly when you consider that other high risk factors like diabetes and high blood pressure are correlated with being overweight or obese.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, kokotg said:

Important note re: this is that 69% of American adults are overweight or obese. It would be considerably more surprising if it WEREN'T true that the majority who have been hospitalized and died were overweight. Particularly when you consider that other high risk factors like diabetes and high blood pressure are correlated with being overweight or obese.

Jinx 😉 

[wathe]

Just now, Not_a_Number said:

But I'd assume having LESS competition for hospital beds than in the NY wave is a good thing, overall? Plus, I assume there's at least a bit more institutional knowledge. 

It won't be directly comparable to New York for lots of reasons:  Covid is a different disease now than it was then (at 75% of our cases are variants), covid care has evolved, we have a completely different healthcare system where everyone is insured and pays zero dollars OOP for hospital care, universal access to primary care with zero cost OOP, more robust social safety nets, less obesity, generally healthier population at baseline.

Our mortality rates for young people are going to increase and likely have already - but the data tend to be published cumulatively, so it's hard to parse it out.

May main point was that when people quote stats like 80% of deaths are in people over 80, well, that's not true anymore.  Vaccinating only the old and high risk won't work, it literally isn't working here.  We are in a very ugly third wave with true healthcare system overwhelm, driven by young, working people.  And they are SICK. 

[kokotg]

4 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Jinx 😉 

oops--I skimmed to see if anyone else had said it, but I didn't skim thoroughly enough!

[wathe]

I'm not expressing myself well.

Mortality rates will increase in generally when health care systems are overwhelmed.  In this wave, the overwhelm has been driven by young, working people, who are disproportionately requiring hospitalization and ICU care as compared to previous waves.  Their mortality rates are going to be higher than they would have been if the system weren't overwhelmed.

Edited - previous, not precious!  There is nothing precious about covid, that's for sure.

Edited April 30, 2021 by wathe

[Not_a_Number]

4 minutes ago, wathe said:

May main point was that when people quote stats like 80% of deaths are in people over 80, well, that's not true anymore.  Vaccinating only the old and high risk won't work, it literally isn't working here.  We are in a very ugly third wave with true healthcare system overwhelm, driven by young, working people.  And they are SICK. 

Ah yeah, I don’t expect that stat to hold up. I was thinking more about things like risk of death in young folks 😞 .

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, wathe said:

I'm not expressing myself well.

Mortality rates will increase in generally when health care systems are overwhelmed.  In this wave, the overwhelm has been driven by young, working people, who are disproportionately requiring hospitalization and ICU care as compared to precious waves.  Their mortality rates are going to be higher than they would have been if the system weren't overwhelmed.

Yes, I’m comparing to NY, which also had overwhelm. Just seems that if not for variants, the rates are likely to be upper bounds.

[Jean in Newcastle]

5 minutes ago, wathe said:

It won't be directly comparable to New York for lots of reasons:  Covid is a different disease now than it was then (at 75% of our cases are variants), covid care has evolved, we have a completely different healthcare system where everyone is insured and pays zero dollars OOP for hospital care, universal access to primary care with zero cost OOP, more robust social safety nets, less obesity, generally healthier population at baseline.

Our mortality rates for young people are going to increase and likely have already - but the data tend to be published cumulatively, so it's hard to parse it out.

May main point was that when people quote stats like 80% of deaths are in people over 80, well, that's not true anymore.  Vaccinating only the old and high risk won't work, it literally isn't working here.  We are in a very ugly third wave with true healthcare system overwhelm, driven by young, working people.  And they are SICK. 

That is why some of us who are "pushing" vaccinations (but suggesting that you talk it over with your doctor because we understand that one-size-does-not-fit-all) are pushing continued vaccinations even when a majority of citizens 65 and older are vaccinated in the US  (80% of those 65 and older have received the vaccine, if I am reading this article correctly and if their data is correct.  https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/herd-immunity-closer-we-think

)

 

[wathe]

7 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Yes, I’m comparing to NY, which also had overwhelm. Just seems that if not for variants, the rates are likely to be upper bounds.

I think India and Brazil would be the current upper-bounds test cases.  Variants and high proportions of young people in their populations.  Unfortunately, with the degree of systems collapse that's happening there, data systems fall apart too.

[wathe]

12 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Yes, I’m comparing to NY, which also had overwhelm. Just seems that if not for variants, the rates are likely to be upper bounds.

It probably is upper-bounds for North America, absent variants - but the data is somewhat flawed because of lack of testing at the time, no?  I suppose antibody data gives us a pretty good idea of what the true case numbers were.  Excess deaths for each age group will be the most reliable, I think.  But that sort of data takes time; we have it for New York, but won't for our current third wave here for quite some time.

[Not_a_Number]

17 minutes ago, wathe said:

It probably is upper-bounds for North America, absent variants - but the data is somewhat flawed because of lack of testing at the time, no?  I suppose antibody data gives us a pretty good idea of what the true case numbers were.  Excess deaths for each age group will be the most reliable, I think.  But that sort of data takes time; we have it for New York, but won't for our current third wave here for quite some time.

Yes, I'm assuming antibody data is about right. That's how I've always done "true" case counts in NY. They did the antibody surveys quite early, and the numbers were large, so I expect they are pretty good. 

[Catwoman]

13 hours ago, Loowit said:

His first DTaP he had no reaction.  His second he developed a low grade fever, rash, cried (screamed) for hours, and had his whole leg swell up.  I was told it wasn't a big deal.  Fever was a coincidence and swelling is normal and he was a colicky baby so crying happened.  The third shot when he was 6 months old.  His whole leg swelled again, red and hot.  He screamed for several days, barely sleeping, He developed a high fever and hives.  I got it put into his chart that he was allergic to the pertussis part of the vaccine, as per the doctor we saw for his reaction.  In the future he received the DT or T shots and did fine.  Then a couple of years ago he was getting boosters.  He was due for tetanus and I let the nurse know that he was allergic to pertussis vaccine.  She was supposed to just give him the tetanus booster, but gave him the TDaP.  That night he had difficulty breathing, hives, high fever, whole body turned red and hot.  It was super scary.  I checked his online chart and that is when I found out he had been given the wrong shot.  Now, I know that I have to double and triple check what vaccine they are injecting.

I’m so sorry about your son!!! I know EXACTLY how you feel because my ds had the exact same reaction to the pertussis part of that shot. And my pediatrician at the time said there was no way the shot had caused the reaction, so he insisted on giving ds the second dose — and the reaction was even worse. I had to argue with the doctor’s office to get the specifics about the vaccination ds had received, and when I called the pharmaceutical company, they were shocked that the doctor had given ds the second shot, and they were very angry that the doctor’s office hadn’t reported ds’s reaction. They told me in no uncertain terms that ds should not get the third dose of that vaccine. They were actually extremely kind and helpful, and never once suggested that ds hadn’t had the “1 in 10,000” severe reaction to that shot.

We never went to that pediatrician again. We switched to the family doctor I’d been going to since I was 8 years old, and we never looked back. And I have been extremely hesitant about vaccinating my ds since then. I didn’t become an anti-vaxxer, because I do believe in the importance of vaccines, but for my own son, I never wanted to risk that kind of reaction again unless I thought the shot was absolutely necessary.

All that said, ds is now 21, and he got the J&J vaccine. I watched him like a hawk afterward, fearful of a bad reaction, but he is fine. He did get a high fever that night, but it only lasted for a few hours and went back down. Other than that, he was ok — and I was a very relieved mom!

[Not_a_Number]

15 hours ago, RootAnn said:

@Not_a_Number Saying this as gently as I can, your questioning cones across as antagonistic and when you stick with it like you inevitably do, it can come across like a toddler's "Why?" questioning.

I have to say, I keep coming back to this sentiment in my head, and I find it really disheartening. 

I'm not stupid. I've noticed like everyone else that the best way to get "Likes" is to keep talking to people who agree with you. If someone disagrees with you, the BEST thing to do, popularity-wise, is to not even really address them: it's to dump a bunch of data that OTHER people that agree with you will read and approve of. In the meantime, you will not be engaging with the other person. You won't be having a meaningful interaction. They will get literally nothing out of this. But it sure is easier. 

So... yeah. I do try to probe what people are thinking. I'm not trying to MAKE anyone do anything. I'm genuinely interested in engaging with people. Even if I disagree with them, I try to be as respectful as possible (and by the way, for me, that includes not comparing people to toddlers, however frustrating I find them. And trust me -- I find people frustrating and irrational quite often.) 

Exchanges like this make me want to give up and retreat into my "science bubble" -- to talk only to people who already think exchanging evidence is valuable and a good idea. It doesn't last, because trying to communicate with people is actually a primary value of mine, for better and worse. But still... it makes me sad. 

[kbutton]

15 hours ago, Syllieann said:

Now obviously, if our hospitals were overwhelmed and our rates were through the roof and the hypothetical young woman has complicating factors, that would make the vaccine more attractive.

15 hours ago, Syllieann said:

 Furthermore, there is a good chance you can choose to vax in the future if the risk/benefit ratio changes, but there is no chance you can unvax.

Not just for you, Syllieann, but for those who are wanting to have greater personal risk before making this decision or who would be more likely to vaccinate if there was a big wave near them, do you expect the vaccine to be easily available when that occurs? 

Do you think you're going to feel safe going to a healthcare facility to get one during a surge if the big vaccination clinics have ceased?

I have been envisioning that once vaccination rates slow to a trickle, it might be more difficult to get a vaccine or more risky because the location changes to something where you're in a facility near sick people to get your shot.

I am curious what others think the vaccination scenario is going to be like later on.

14 hours ago, Frances said:

I’m also very concerned about vaccine hesitancy and ever reaching herd immunity. 

Me too! Locally, people are very militant about wanting things open. I am concerned that we'll temporarily get close enough that they toss out masks, and then the variants will get out of control. 

14 hours ago, KSera said:

Yeah, I get worried that there will be too many people in "wait and see mode" to keep us from having another crisis level surge somewhere, and suddenly everyone will want to be vaccinated, and it will be too late at that point for vaccination to turn a surge like that around. 

I am concerned about this as well as concerned about the availability during a surge. Our big surge occurred when it was healthcare workers getting vaccinated. Then it was congregate living facilities (nursing homes, prisons), so the shots went to those places--people didn't have to sign up, etc. It could be done relatively efficiently with populations that were getting the shot via daily activities.

13 hours ago, Loowit said:

I get that they are not trying to be cold or heartless, but it still sounds that way because to me it is my real life child that suffered a severe vaccine reaction.  It is a personal, gut reaction, and probably not something I can ever view with cold, hard facts.

I actually had a doctor at one point corner me in an exam room and refuse to let me leave until I agreed to let my DS get vaccinated for a shot he was due to have.  It was not his primary care doctor, who agreed to put it off until he was a couple years older.  At the time I was suffering from post-partum depression from the birth of my third child and not able to stand up for myself or my child.  Fortunately, he suffered no long term problems from it, but it sure made me distrust the medical community.

What happened to you is unconscionable. 

I get personal reactions when there has been a bad experience. I have a friend who gets seriously ill when she gets the flu vaccine (and maybe others, but she's past the age to need a bunch of new ones). She is seeing an immunologist to get to the bottom of it to see if she can get a covid shot. 

I think it's okay to be up front about having had a bad experience with a vaccine, especially an allergic reaction. There are gray areas--another friend has a daughter whose doctor think she got POTS from a specific vaccine. Frankly, she has an underlying condition that makes her extremely susceptible to POTS, so it might not have had anything to do with that vaccine. But I would hesitate in her shoes, knowing that the doctor is convinced. I simply told her that if I heard of any good information for people with POTS and her underlying condition, I would pass it along. Unfortunately, from what I gather, the POTS/dysautonomia community is not all on the same page about this like many communities. 

13 hours ago, mjbucks1 said:

So, I am vaccine hesitant.  I have worked in healthcare as a physical therapist for 25 years.  I did cancer research in undergrad.  My point is that I am not an anti-vaxer and I am very much a science/data person.  I have tinnitus and a history of vestibular issues/dizziness, as well as myoclonus in my left ear.  I was actually scheduled to get the vaccine, but then thought I would look at VAERS.  I saw reports of tinnitus, hearing loss, and dizziness.  I did more searching and found an article addressing this issue.  I then joined a FB group of people who are experiencing tinnitus/hearing loss/dizziness shortly after being vaccinated.  For some, the side effects have gone away.  For others, it has not and has been debilitating. 

Those are very big QOL issues. So sorry. (On a side note, did you know that if you get to a point where you need hearing aids anyway, they have some that can often mitigate tinnitus? It's very cool!) 

People often don't think of things like tinnitus as being a big deal, but it's absolutely exhausting and difficult for some people. My mom had a similar QOL issue that she sought surgery for (different sensory system). I was kind of freaked out as it's a freaky surgery, but I googled articles about the problem and found out that AIDS patients reported much better QOL than people with my mom's issue, which doesn't affect her health at all. She had not seen that information, and she really appreciated hearing it put such a black and white way. She wouldn't have been dissuaded from the surgery because she had a lot of confidence in it and the surgeon, but the validation meant a lot to her. 

So, here's some validation. 

12 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

I think in time our best hope is to have Covid under control like we do with a flu. Still 50k it so people will die every year, but infection numbers will not go out of control. Frankly there is no point of talking to people who have already made up their minds. Personal experiences might change some minds though. 

Does anyone have a real idea of what it will take to get there at this point? I felt hopeful, and now it feels like it's going to be terrible.

I have one kiddo left to be immunized, and if Pfizer is available for the 12-15 group, we'll be there asap. I feel almost like if we want to do something other than stay locked up forever, this is the time to do it--locally lower (but not ideal) numbers, outdoor options, and fully vaxed family. Time to get medical appointments in, see the grandparents (vaxed), and risk short trips to carefully selected stores. Then I feel like we'll be back into the thick of it again. I am really hoping we don't second guess my older son's need to get vocational training in the fall in person (we put it off a year for covid). If they allow him to mask for class, I don't think we can justify putting it off unless things get absolutely terrible for young adults in the next couple of months now that he is vaccinated.

3 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

I just try to see the endgame here without the vaccine and I can’t. 

Exactly.

2 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

This. My job as director of a community fine arts program is toast. I am totally down with private programs requiring proof of vaccine for participation and attendance, and then getting back to business.

No one here will implement this kind of strategy. I'm in a very "it's a hoax" area. I have kids in band and choir, and one of them is seriously considering music therapy, which means he has to rejoin asap. It's easier to plan to go into music and change your mind than to get into it late.

[kbutton]

5 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I have to say, I keep coming back to this sentiment in my head, and I find it really disheartening. 

I'm not stupid. I've noticed like everyone else that the best way to get "Likes" is to keep talking to people who agree with you. If someone disagrees with you, the BEST thing to do, popularity-wise, is to not even really address them: it's to dump a bunch of data that OTHER people that agree with you will read and approve of. In the meantime, you will not be engaging with the other person. You won't be having a meaningful interaction. They will get literally nothing out of this. But it sure is easier. 

So... yeah. I do try to probe what people are thinking. I'm not trying to MAKE anyone do anything. I'm genuinely interested in engaging with people. Even if I disagree with them, I try to be as respectful as possible (and by the way, for me, that includes not comparing people to toddlers, however frustrating I find them. And trust me -- I find people frustrating and irrational quite often.) 

Exchanges like this make me want to give up and retreat into my "science bubble" -- to talk only to people who already think exchanging evidence is valuable and a good idea. It doesn't last, because trying to communicate with people is actually a primary value of mine, for better and worse. But still... it makes me sad. 

Keep at it! You make conversations on here more logical, I think.

I feel like you have explained this enough that you're solicitous. Maybe there is a disclaimer that might make a few people happy, but I don't know.

But retreating would be sad. 

[Catwoman]

23 hours ago, JennyD said:

Yes, the husband of one of my best friends had an organ transplant last year and is on heavy-duty immunosuppressants.  He got vaccinated the second he could, but the studies that are tricking out about efficacy in transplant recipients are not encouraging.  As long as there is a lot of virus floating around -- and they live in an area with middling vaccination rates -- they are just stuck.  

 

23 hours ago, Pawz4me said:

And those who can be vaccinated but likely won't have a robust immune response. The stats on vaccine response in people with certain types of cancer look particularly bad.

 

 

The vaccine efficacy for solid organ transplant patients may be as low as 14%, and there is no way to tell how effective the vaccine is for an individual patient. An antibody test is going to show a positive result whether the vaccine is 1% effective or 100% effective, and it appears that the vaccines work at least a little bit for basically everyone, so transplant patients (and older people and cancer patients and anyone else on immunosuppressants or who has a compromised immune system) really needs to count on the kindness of the rest of the population, and hope that most people will decide to be vaccinated.

In the meantime, we are fully vaccinated here at our house, but we are still being as careful as we ever were, because many other people are choosing not to be vaccinated, and — more importantly — they aren’t even doing things like wearing masks and social distancing. 

If a person is hesitant to be vaccinated and feel they are low risk for the virus, I can understand that hesitancy. I can understand wanting to wait a bit. But I really wish those same people would at least do everything else they can to protect the more vulnerable people in the population. 

[Syllieann]

4 minutes ago, kbutton said:

Not just for you, Syllieann, but for those who are wanting to have greater personal risk before making this decision or who would be more likely to vaccinate if there was a big wave near them, do you expect the vaccine to be easily available when that occurs? 

Do you think you're going to feel safe going to a healthcare facility to get one during a surge if the big vaccination clinics have ceased?

I have been envisioning that once vaccination rates slow to a trickle, it might be more difficult to get a vaccine or more risky because the location changes to something where you're in a facility near sick people to get your shot.

I'm already vaccinated, so this isn't terribly relevant for me.  I was just defending the right of someone who is low risk and low exposure to wait for more info without being harassed to death.  Our government has made clear that we are going to keep enough vaccine for every American who wants a vaccine to get one.  Someone living in a densely populated area might have issues getting a vaccine if there's a surge, but we already have 50% with the first dose in so I don't think it's a big risk.  We are both just guessing on how hard it easy it would be though, just like we are guessing about a lot of things because we don't know.