Jump to content

Menu

CDC mask announcement (a new thread)


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Danae said:

Right now case numbers appear to be dropping off a cliff in areas with high vaccination rates.  IF that continues it could change whether emergency use for under-12 is even approved.  If there's no emergency there's no justification for an EUA.

The main issue in the fall with kids will be schools and wanting to be able to open them without mask mandates, distancing, etc. We won't really be able to tell much over the summer about how much covid is still circulating because kids aren't vaccinated. And small numbers can turn into big numbers really quickly if you stuff everyone back in full classrooms, doing indoor sports, etc. with no precautions and no vaccines.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, rebcoola said:

Ugh I've gotten multiple notices through email/Facebook for such and such place or group that masks will now be optional. Reasoning being that those who want to be vaxxed are.  Our state hasn't even lifted the mask mandate just adjusted to match CDC guidelines.  Obviously they aren't worried about being shut down.  Our area is nowhere near ready we have ~ 20% fully vaxxed ~30% having one shot.  Our positivity rate hovers around 10% and our case rate is ~200/per 100k and not trending down.

My city has dropped required masks in public buildings, and I teach in a community center. I am planning to leave them required for my classes this summer, because except for one 17 yr old, none of my kids are fully vaccinated yet, and most aren’t eligible. I’m not sure what I can do if someone refuses.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really expect businesses and stuff to really enforce the mask mandate.  But having signs saying  no mask required for vaccinated is different  than ones saying masks optional.    Most of the people I know wouldn't lie but if it says optional they will be done.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

My city has dropped required masks in public buildings, and I teach in a community center. I am planning to leave them required for my classes this summer, because except for one 17 yr old, none of my kids are fully vaccinated yet, and most aren’t eligible. I’m not sure what I can do if someone refuses.

 

 

This is an important issue, putting the onus back on small business owners to set their own terms. I imagine it will be like ‘no shoes, no shirt, no service’. You comply or you go elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, kokotg said:

The main issue in the fall with kids will be schools and wanting to be able to open them without mask mandates, distancing, etc. We won't really be able to tell much over the summer about how much covid is still circulating because kids aren't vaccinated. And small numbers can turn into big numbers really quickly if you stuff everyone back in full classrooms, doing indoor sports, etc. with no precautions and no vaccines.

I hadn't run the numbers in the big school system next door (that's taking basically no precautions other than quarantines for positives and close contacts and teachers wearing masks) much in these times of relatively low covid, so I just took a peak. Incidence rate over 14 days (as of last Friday) for students was 194/100,000...compared to 99/100,000 for the county as a whole over 14 days. So an incidence rate nearly twice as high for school kids in that county as for the total population. ETA: that hasn't changed much even as overall numbers have gone down; it's been 2-3x higher for kids every time I've checked. E(again)TA: and, of course, that's given a presumably significantly lower testing rate for kids.

Edited by kokotg
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

...for my adjacent county, incidentally, with a mask mandate (but no distancing, hybrid, etc), the incidence rate is 63/100,000 over 14 days for schools; 108/100,000 over the same period for the county as a whole. 

Edited by kokotg
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, rebcoola said:

I don't really expect businesses and stuff to really enforce the mask mandate.  But having signs saying  no mask required for vaccinated is different  than ones saying masks optional.    Most of the people I know wouldn't lie but if it says optional they will be done.

Yeah, I think that if people believe masks work and are still statistically important (given the case and vax #s of a given time and place), the message should be vax or mask for now.

Our state mask mandate ends June 2, but for summer camps, I will advise my kids to keep masking in indoor camps/sports until 2 weeks post vax (obviously longer if the camp requires it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Penelope said:

Aren’t side effects more common the younger you are? They even found a slight increase in symptoms for 12-15 compared to older teens and young twenties.

Oh, did they? Mind citing?

 

1 hour ago, Penelope said:

So the age of those we know may reflect our experience in reported side effects.

Maybe, although I’m citing a large range. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Penelope said:

I don’t think anyone can say that we know the vaccine will have an individual net benefit for the average young, healthy child under 12. We also can’t say that it will have a net harm.

The trial data isn’t out yet, so obviously we can’t say anything. I’ll be very surprised if the harm profile for the vaccine looks worse than the virus, though... on the other hand, it could look worse than a 1% chance of the virus. But I don’t know whether I expect numbers to stay low.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a few percentage points higher in the Pfizer data, and I saw it commented on, somewhere. I don’t have a link handy but I think it might have been the ACIP meeting slides that might have had the comparison.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dmmetler said:

My city has dropped required masks in public buildings, and I teach in a community center. I am planning to leave them required for my classes this summer, because except for one 17 yr old, none of my kids are fully vaccinated yet, and most aren’t eligible. I’m not sure what I can do if someone refuses.

Can you keep windows open?  For my country of origin, the current clusters are larger in air-conditioned places. Air flow and ventilation would reduce risks. I am sensitive to pollen but I would rather suffer pollen allergies than bad air flow. 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/office-buildings.html

  • Increase circulation of outdoor air as much as possible by opening windows and doors if possible, and using fans. Do not open windows and doors if doing so poses a safety or health risk for occupants, including children (e.g., a risk of falling or of breathing outdoor environmental contaminants such as carbon monoxide, molds, or pollens).”
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

 But I don’t know whether I expect numbers to stay low.

 

My best guess is that summer will be fairly awesome (and I'm planning to enjoy every second of it). The question is whether we're able/willing to do what we need to do in the fall/winter when K-12 and colleges start back up, people start to go back inside, we see whether boosters are needed, etc. etc. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Penelope said:

It was a few percentage points higher in the Pfizer data, and I saw it commented on, somewhere. I don’t have a link handy but I think it might have been the ACIP meeting slides that might have had the comparison.

Hmmm. Yes, I’m seeing that now that I’m Googling. That’s a little disappointing, honestly, since kids are so often asymptomatic for actual COVID...

I wonder whether the average duration of side effects is longer or shorter?

Edited by Not_a_Number
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, kokotg said:

My best guess is that summer will be fairly awesome (and I'm planning to enjoy every second of it). The question is whether we're able/willing to do what we need to do in the fall/winter when K-12 and colleges start back up, people start to go back inside, we see whether boosters are needed, etc. etc. 

Yes, I think the summer will be great. We’re going to make good use of it!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Penelope said:

It was a few percentage points higher in the Pfizer data, and I saw it commented on, somewhere. I don’t have a link handy but I think it might have been the ACIP meeting slides that might have had the comparison.

I didn't see that, but I recall reading that about age 55 is where average side effects from the vax exceed the severity of average Covid symptoms.  In other words, those under 55 are likely to have a rougher time from the vax than the virus.

But if you look at the "worst case" situations, let's say the worst 1%, then yeah, the virus is worse than the vax for most age groups.  Still not sure about little kids yet.

Unless they come up with a vax that isn't hard on young kids, for at least many parents, it will be hard to justify the kiddy vax if the cases stay low.  Or maybe they would go for 1 shot and call that good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

Unless they come up with a vax that isn't hard on young kids, for at least many parents, it will be hard to justify the kiddy vax if the cases stay low.  Or maybe they would go for 1 shot and call that good enough.

Some parents want their kids to be vaccinated for summer camps and also for schools to be in session without masks for this fall. I don’t know if the state would require for K-12th school students though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

Some parents want their kids to be vaccinated for summer camps and also for schools to be in session without masks for this fall. I don’t know if the state would require for K-12th school students though.

Most parents I know have their kids in team sports and travel teams and they are getting their kids vaccinated so that the sport opportunities can increase during summer and fall. Most of them are back to regular practice schedules with masks outdoors, but they hope to do a lot in the Fall with vaccines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I would like to vaccinate my youngest because he wants to go back to orchestra. Also, he has a high risk brother and mom. I feel more comfortable not having someone catch COVID and increase the chances of vaccine breakthrough in my home. Yes, I know that they aren't so sure how often kids spread it, and the breakthrough on the vaccines is small, but it is also true that more exposure to COVID makes catching it more likely. Then there is the fact that I am concerned about the long term consequences of this virus for people, including little kids. Kids have a long life in front of them. I feel the vaccine is a safer bet. 

Edited by bluemongoose
I shouldn't try to comment on a phone!
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/17/2021 at 4:38 PM, Spy Car said:

The science of fully vaccinated people going unmasked, which no one is disputing.

But that's not the problem with the CDC's decision, of which you are fully aware.

Unvaccinated people going unmasked is a direct threat to human life and children are still largely unprotected.

Bill

 

 

This just really isn't true.

https://slate.com/human-interest/2021/03/children-and-covid-transmission-your-child-is-basically-a-vaccinated-adult.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

An opinion piece by a film critic who is full of it is hardly persuasive.

Bill

I don't think you really care about the data. You just want what you want and if you can get the government to impose your will on others, so be it. As long as you feel safe, the rights of others be damned. Who is really the selfish one?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mom0012 said:

I don't think you really care about the data. You just want what you want and if you can get the government to impose your will on others, so be it. As long as you feel safe, the rights of others be damned. Who is really the selfish one?

And clearly, you have plenty of company here. In the well-trained mind echo chamber.

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mom0012 said:

I don't think you really care about the data. You just want what you want and if you can get the government to impose your will on others, so be it. As long as you feel safe, the rights of others be damned. Who is really the selfish one?

You think wrongly.

You have showed your true colors with the other comments. Read you loud and clear.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Mom0012 said:

And clearly, you have plenty of company here. In the well-trained mind echo chamber.

Fortunately, there are a lot of highly-intelligent and well-informed members of this forum.

Bill

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mom0012 said:

I don't think you really care about the data. You just want what you want and if you can get the government to impose your will on others, so be it. As long as you feel safe, the rights of others be damned. Who is really the selfish one?

I personally care about the data. A lot. But I'm not all that convinced by the data on kids. If I were sure kids transmitted as little as some people have claimed, I'd feel a lot better. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I personally care about the data. A lot. But I'm not all that convinced by the data on kids. If I were sure kids transmitted as little as some people have claimed, I'd feel a lot better. 

I really think it is pretty clear. Kids are safer from covid than they are from the flu. That's been known for a long time. I honestly don't have the emotional energy to try and dig up all of the information, but it's out there.

And I get being scared for your kid. I haven't read through this whole thread, but it seems that whenever anyone does post any actual data, people just dismiss it.

And obviously, you don't have to listen to me. You have no reason to. It just gets so frustrating to try to post any alternative views on these boards over the last number of years. I haven't been on here in ages because of that. I shouldn't have looked at this thread. It's just very upsetting to see so many people truly unaware of what their true risk is.

 

 

Edited by Mom0012
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mom0012 said:

I really think it is pretty clear. Kids are safer from covid than they are from the flu. That's been known for a long time. I honestly don't have the emotional energy to try and dig up all of the information, but it's out there.

I've actually followed the data pretty thoroughly, and that's really not my impression from what I've seen. But honestly, I'm tired today, and I don't want to try to convince you if you aren't interested. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I've actually followed the data pretty thoroughly, and that's really not my impression from what I've seen. But honestly, I'm tired today, and I don't want to try to convince you if you aren't interested. 

Did you read the article I linked? I'm not saying you have to believe that article, but did you look at it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I'll take that as a "I'm not interested in discussing the issue"? I can read it again if you think that's required for a fair exchange of information. 

No. I just appreciate you being polite. I can't get into a big discussion here because I feel like there will be 20 people coming at me from the other side in a matter of minutes and it's just emotionally draining and not something I can manage.

But, thank you very much for your nice reply. I really do appreciate that.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mom0012 said:

No. I just appreciate you being polite. I can't get into a big discussion here because I feel like there will be 20 people coming at me from the other side in a matter of minutes and it's just emotionally draining and not something I can manage.

Oh, yes, I've been in that position. It's unpleasant. I totally get it! 

 

Just now, Mom0012 said:

But, thank you very much for your nice reply. I really do appreciate that.

You really, really don't need to thank me for being polite. 

By the way, I looked up the numbers some more, and I think you're right that for immediate symptoms, COVID looks like it's less risky for kids than the flu. I suppose I knew that before, but this year's teeny flu numbers have kind of fooled me 😉 . So it's a good reminder. 

I'm personally much more paranoid about whether there's a serious (say, 5%) chance of long-term disability from COVID than I am about the initial symptoms. And the problem is that I don't actually feel like I even have a ballpark estimate for this possibility. I hope we know more sometime soon... 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

'm personally much more paranoid about whether there's a serious (say, 5%) chance of long-term disability from COVID than I am about the initial symptoms. And the problem is that I don't actually feel like I even have a ballpark estimate for this possibility. I hope we know more sometime soon... 

 

Thank you, again. And that is reasonable and something I can totally understand. I don't have young children anymore so I am no longer as emotionally impacted by these types of fears. But, I do remember when the H1N1 flu was being hyped up years ago and I took both my kids and got them the vaccine for that. I had never gotten them a flu vaccine before, but I was worried for them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Mom0012 said:

Thank you, again. And that is reasonable and something I can totally understand. I don't have young children anymore so I am no longer as emotionally impacted by these types of fears. But, I do remember when the H1N1 flu was being hyped up years ago and I took both my kids and got them the vaccine for that. I had never gotten them a flu vaccine before, but I was worried for them.

I really wish there was data out there that would assure me that this probability is teeny and that I don't need to worry!! If you ever find some, please let me know, lol. I don't like worrying. We were never the kind of family who carried our hand-sanitizer everywhere, you know? We've always been relatively easygoing about germs. So this is a change of pace for me, and one I don't like particularly. So if it's irrational, I'd want to be the first to know 😉 . 

Edited by Not_a_Number
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I don't think covid is necessarily more dangerous for kids than flu (the number of deaths in kids for covid vs. in an average flu year supports that). I do think there's a lot we don't know about long term complications. I do think it's foolish to assume covid won't evolve to be more dangerous for kids in the future. And I also think that I don't want my kid to get the flu, either. No, we don't mask regularly for flu season (although they do in some places), but flu is also a lot easier to prevent by staying home when you have symptoms than covid is. I'd be pretty mad if my kid got the flu because someone went to school or wherever when they knew they had symptoms. Unfortunately, staying home when you're sick doesn't cut it for preventing covid transmission; otherwise we'd be done with it by now (like how there's been so little flu this year). I think wearing a mask is pretty much the common courtesy equivalent of staying home when you're sick to prevent flu transmission, and it's also considerably EASIER and less burdensome than staying home when you're sick for most people. And, of course, we DO vaccinate kids for the flu. ETA: and flu outbreaks cause a lot of disruption when they run through schools...particularly in the schools near me that haven't taken basic covid precautions, that has been much more true for covid, with lots and lots of quarantines, teachers out and not enough subs, and not infrequent closures of entire schools for a period of time when numbers got too bad. Even for kids who don't have serious cases of covid, and even if we're not worried about long term side effects, uncontrolled spread can really mess things up for them.

Edited by kokotg
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kokotg said:

I don't think covid is necessarily more dangerous for kids than flu (the number of deaths in kids for covid vs. in an average flu year supports that). I do think there's a lot we don't know about long term complications. I do think it's foolish to assume covid won't evolve to be more dangerous for kids in the future. And I also think that I don't want my kid to get the flu, either.

Yep to all of those. That's exactly how I feel. It just feels like there are a lot of unknowns... 

On the bright side, at least testing is quite robust now, so I feel like we'll get fair warning if cases are going up or kids are getting much sicker... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, SKL said:

I didn't see that, but I recall reading that about age 55 is where average side effects from the vax exceed the severity of average Covid symptoms.  In other words, those under 55 are likely to have a rougher time from the vax than the virus.

Do you have a link for that? The 45-55 group is still relatively risky for Covid, and the number of people who have more than 1 (possibly 2) days of vaccine side effects is tiny. So, I’d be interested to see that. 

2 hours ago, Mom0012 said:

There was actually TONS of discussion about this article from virologists and epidemiologists when it came out, and I read it then. They were super frustrated with Slate  (and even more so The Atlantic which also published it, since The Atlantic usually has a much higher standard than Slate ) for having published it, because it’s not accurate in so many ways  and the person who wrote it was really not qualified to speak to those issues. I could tell you some of the specific issues with the article, if you are interested.

I saw you said you haven’t been around here in a long time and haven’t read these threads, so you probably missed that there are a lot of people here who are reading a whole lot on this and are quite educated on the facts about what is known about Covid at this point. I don’t see much issue of an echo chamber regarding Covid here, as I believe most of us get our primary information from sources outside TWTM  I don’t consider something posted here as being truth without verifying it, including checking the reliability of the source. There are a few posters who cite their  posts really well, which makes the information they post more trustworthy for me, because I have been able to vet their data and sources.

 

Edited by KSera
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, KSera said:

Do you have a link for that? The 45-55 group is still relatively risky for Covid, and the number of people who have more than 1 (possibly 2) days of vaccine side effects is tiny. So, I’d be interested to see that. 

For the record, most people I knew had more than 2 days of vaccine side effects, although I very much doubt the vaccine is worse than the disease on average for them!! 

 

4 minutes ago, KSera said:

There are a few posters who cite their  posts really well, which makes the information they post more trustworthy for me, because I have been able to vet their data and sources.

I probably don't cite enough, frankly 🙂 . It's all kind of tied together in my head and hard to cite sometimes. I can usually cite if forced though, lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

For the record, most people I knew had more than 2 days of vaccine side effects, although I very much doubt the vaccine is worse than the disease on average for them!! 

 

I really think you've had an unlucky sample. I have to go back to the trial data and what they have from v-safe so far, but that doesn't match what I recall at all. Actually, now that I think of it, I can say before even going back to the data, that one of my parents was having side effects on day 3 (but it only started that day, so lasted only 36 hours), everything I was finding said that someone should call their doctor if they had a reaction that lasted more than two days. I'll go find the side effect break down though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I really wish there was data out there that would assure me that this probability is teeny and that I don't need to worry!! 

For data on kids with long Covid, we need kids who have recovered from Covid. Since none of us want kids to get Covid, the data may sadly come from places like India which is still suffering badly from their own B.1.617 variant.

31 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

On the bright side, at least testing is quite robust now, so I feel like we'll get fair warning if cases are going up or kids are getting much sicker... 

I’m following the current news from Singapore and Taiwan.  Both countries have to close schools and revert back to home based learning. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-57153195

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KSera said:

I really think you've had an unlucky sample. I have to go back to the trial data and what they have from v-safe so far, but that doesn't match what I recall at all. Actually, now that I think of it, I can say before even going back to the data, that one of my parents was having side effects on day 3 (but it only started that day, so lasted only 36 hours), everything I was finding said that someone should call their doctor if they had a reaction that lasted more than two days. I'll go find the side effect break down though.

Yeah, to be fair I'm counting people who had less than 24 hours of side-effects but on Day 3. But both DH and I actually had side-effects for more than 1-2 days. I think mine have fully subsided after like 3 weeks, so yes... not a lucky sample. 

I'm going to do a poll on this, I think. My anecdata doesn't seem to match the trial data super well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

For data on kids with long Covid, we need kids who have recovered from Covid. Since none of us want kids to get Covid, the data may sadly come from places like India which is still suffering badly from their own B.1.617 variant.

I think we already have millions of kids who've recovered from COVID, whether we like it or not! We just need to follow them... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, KSera said:

I really think you've had an unlucky sample. I have to go back to the trial data and what they have from v-safe so far, but that doesn't match what I recall at all. Actually, now that I think of it, I can say before even going back to the data, that one of my parents was having side effects on day 3 (but it only started that day, so lasted only 36 hours), everything I was finding said that someone should call their doctor if they had a reaction that lasted more than two days. I'll go find the side effect break down though.

This is the latest v-safe data I have found so far. It's mid-February, but includes millions of people. And I actually think side effects are likely to be slightly over reprented in v-safe, because people with side effects are more likely to participate. Even so, it looks better than your sample has faired (but seems pretty true to what I've seen--seems to me it's been about half and half with people I know having more than sore arm or not, and only about 25% having fever after the second dose (much less after 1st). I want to see the info about how long it lasts for most people though. Somewhere I saw that. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-02/28-03-01/05-covid-Shimabukuro.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I think we already have millions of kids who've recovered from COVID, whether we like it or not! We just need to follow them... 

 

May 3rd https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/05/03/993141036/children-now-account-for-22-of-new-u-s-covid-cases-why-is-that

What about "long COVID" – are kids showing extended months of symptoms from the disease?

In kids, we have seen it, but it doesn't seem to be as common as adults. We're taking care of a few kids now who are still having symptoms well over a month past their infections. I think, as little as we know about long COVID in adults, we know even less in kids. We really have even less of an understanding of the overall epidemiology of how common it is in kids. 

The other question mark in my mind around this phenomenon is, many viruses can trigger sort of longer-term symptoms. A classic example would be mononucleosis: Some kids will have fatigue and symptoms for six to 12 months, occasionally even longer. So what's unclear to me at this point is if long-term symptoms are more frequent with COVID-19 than with some of the other viruses we've seen. But I wouldn't say that we're seeing sort of an epidemic of long COVID kids the way we have in adults.

How difficult is it to get data on children and COVID-19? I know that for its weekly reports, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children's Hospital Association compile data from 49 states, along with New York City, Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia and Guam. That leaves out the rest of New York state. And Texas only reports on the lower age range for a small percentage of the state's cases.

That's correct. There have been problems with data around this pandemic all along, including this particular situation. I think as long as you're comparing apples to apples, recognizing the limitations, I think that you can interpret the data. But, yeah, it's clearly an undercount.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Found it. This has a good break down of side effects by age group, separated by local vs systemic. For the over 18 age group:

"Overall, the median onset of systemic adverse events in the vaccine group in general was 1 to 2 days after either dose and lasted a median duration of 1 day. " (bolding mine)

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html

Also:

"For both age groups, fatigue, headache and new or worsened muscle pain were most common. The majority of systemic events were mild or moderate in severity, after both doses and in both age groups. Fever was more common after the second dose and in the younger group (15.8%) compared to the older group (10.9%)"

 

For the 12-15 year olds, it does say a median duration of 1-2 days for systemic effects. That data is at the bottom.

Edited by KSera
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KSera said:

Found it. This has a good break down of side effects by age group, separated by local vs systemic. For the over 18 age group:

"Overall, the median onset of systemic adverse events in the vaccine group in general was 1 to 2 days after either dose and lasted a median duration of 1 day. " (bolding mine)

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html

 

For the 12-15 year olds, it does say a median duration of 1-2 days for systemic effects. That data is at the bottom.

So, this is pure laziness on my part, but did they only let people keep the diary for 7 days? That's what the site seems to suggest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

So, this is pure laziness on my part, but did they only let people keep the diary for 7 days? That's what the site seems to suggest. 

I don't know. V safe starts checking weekly after the initial week (or maybe it's after 10 days?). It says that side effect diminished each day after peaking on day 1, so I would expect there just werent' many people that still had anything to report on day 7 (my dh wanted to stop doing v-safe after 5 days, because he didn't see the point of them continuing to ask, and I told him he had to keep doing it as long as they ask!)

Also, the data I linked is the Pfizer one. I just realized that. You can click in the side bar to switch to Moderna or JJ.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KSera said:

I don't know. V safe starts checking weekly after the initial week (or maybe it's after 10 days?). It says that side effect diminished each day after peaking on day 1, so I would expect there just werent' many people that still had anything to report on day 7 (my dh wanted to stop doing v-safe after 5 days, because he didn't see the point of them continuing to ask, and I told him he had to keep doing it as long as they ask!)

Also, the data I linked is the Pfizer one. I just realized that. You can click in the side bar to switch to Moderna or JJ.

This looks like trial data to me, not VSafe data, though? 

Let me go find their actual paper. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

For the record, most people I knew had more than 2 days of vaccine side effects, although I very much doubt the vaccine is worse than the disease on average for them!!

How many people do you know under 55 who had Covid, and of those people, how many had a really bad case?  Was the average really worse than 2+ days of post-second-vax crud?

Even over 55, there are still many people who are completely asymptomatic.  I have a 60yo friend who found out she had antibodies.  They told her it was from a recent case.  She can't remember any time she felt even a little sick in the past 9 months.

I'm thinking about all the people I know who have had Covid.  Almost none of them felt particularly bad.  Maybe 4 people out of all of them, and they had multiple other health issues before getting Covid.  The ones I know who felt bad were achy for a couple days.  Which sounds exactly like the typical side effects from the vax.

I still decided to get my kids and myself vaxed, but not to protect us.  We want to be able to see old/at-risk folks without worrying, and we don't like the disruption of being quarantined.  We decided the pain was worth the gain for us.  But more info is needed before the same can be said for little kids IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...