Covid-19 vaccination - anyone scheduled yet?

Joined
Jan 6, 2011
Messages
1,474
Location
SE USA
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
824
Location
MN, USA
I have two friends that, like me, are 70 years old. They have the same health profile that I have and live in the same county that I live in. They registered in the county's online vaccination system 15 minutes before I registered. That was on January 18, the first day it was possible to register. They received an email February 7 allowing them to make an appointment to get their first shot. I received that email this morning, which is five days later. What a difference 15 minutes makes!
When I got online at 5:30AM to sign up, there were 16,000 people ahead of me. My spouse spoke to a patient who went online at 3AM and there were 9,000 people ahead of her. It went quickly though and I was able to register about 90 minutes later.
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
824
Location
MN, USA
Final report on my second vaccination: I had another low point yesterday afternoon late, feeling a bit achy and cold, but a couple of glasses of wine and a solid meal put that right. I feel back to normal this morning except for a slightly sore shoulder.

My wife never reported anything but a sore shoulder.

So the effects lasted a bit over 24 hours.
I got my first shot (Moderna) on the 14th. I had a bit of a sore arm on the 14th. It was pretty sore on the 15th and when we got to dinner (36 hours after the vaccination) I just looked at the food and said 'No way' and had a slight fever under 100. The odd thing was that 4 hours later I felt fine. It's very individual.
 
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
24,053
Location
SW Virginia
Just for information, here's an article explaining the vaccines and statistics:

Covid Vaccine

Full disclosure - I know the author . . .
Actually, his numbers are a bit misleading. As I pointed out in a previous post, in the clinical trials only 0.04% of vaccinated individuals contracted Covid-19. But also, only 0.8% of the unvaccinated population contracted it. That leads to an efficacy of 95%.

0.04% of 40,000 is 16, not a thousand.

So your chances of getting Covid-19 are quite low even without a vaccination, but much lower still with it.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
24,705
Location
Orland Park, Illinois
only 0.8% of the unvaccinated population contracted it.


So your chances of getting Covid-19 are quite low even without a vaccination, but much lower still with it.
Of course, those percentages relate to the trial period. Your chances of getting infected with COVID over a longer period of time are much higher. For example, nearly 30 million people in the US have tested positive for COVID so far...or just under 10% of the population—and those are just the ones who were tested.

My personal experience also supports a much higher rate than 0.8% chance of infection. I coach a youth baseball team (4 coaches and 11 players). 3 coaches and 4 players have had COVID...and two of those coaches could be “long haulers”—one has been out for three months.

My neighbor was hospitalized with COVID for 9 days and a close friend and co-worker was hospitalized for 24 days and nearly died. Many family members have tested positive and one just died last week of COVID—although he also had serious underlying conditions.

I realize these are just personal experiences and I am not disputing the trial data—just pointing out that over time the infection rate is much higher than during a shorter trial period.

Glenn
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
18,571
Location
Hong Kong
Real Name
Phil
Actually, his numbers are a bit misleading. As I pointed out in a previous post, in the clinical trials only 0.04% of vaccinated individuals contracted Covid-19. But also, only 0.8% of the unvaccinated population contracted it. That leads to an efficacy of 95%.

0.04% of 40,000 is 16, not a thousand.

So your chances of getting Covid-19 are quite low even without a vaccination, but much lower still with it.
Sorry Jim, I have to point it out again. it's 0.04% of vaccinated individuals and 0.8% of unvaccinated individuals having documented symptomatic disease up to the time of the interim analysis. We don't know how many had contracted it.
 
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
24,053
Location
SW Virginia
Of course, those percentages relate to the trial period. Your chances of getting infected with COVID over a longer period of time are much higher. For example, nearly 30 million people in the US have tested positive for COVID so far...or just under 10% of the population—and those are just the ones who were tested.
Agreed, "efficacy" refers to clinical trials, whereas "effectiveness" refers to real world data. And the numbers I quoted were from the clinical trials.
 
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
24,053
Location
SW Virginia
Sorry Jim, I have to point it out again. it's 0.04% of vaccinated individuals and 0.8% of unvaccinated individuals having documented symptomatic disease up to the time of the interim analysis. We don't know how many had contracted it.
O.K., I stand corrected on that point. But implying that 95% efficacy means a 5% chance of getting the virus is not quite right either.
 
Joined
May 27, 2005
Messages
9,644
Location
Clearwater, Florida
To me, the benefits of the current crop of vaccines is their ability to limit severe disease. We can have discussions about their ability to prevent infection, but with the high rate of asymptomatic disease, it will be a long time before we actually know the efficacy of these vaccines in actually preventing infection and transmission. Most importantly, the vaccines can prevent people from developing severe disease and death.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
19,025
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
with the high rate of asymptomatic disease, it will be a long time before we actually know the efficacy of these vaccines in actually preventing infection and transmission.
I don't think we'll ever know that information with any reasonable degree of certainty. That's because even if America does eventually do ample testing, which also means doing ample contact tracing, it will happen far too late to give us the data we need to determine the rate of prevention of infection and transmission.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
1,926
Location
Johns Creek, Ga
Agreed. There just isn't enough of the stuff yet. And, as always, rural/remote areas are underresourced and underserved.
Here, in GA initially, most anyone that was in a rural area and fit the rollout guideline was able to get the vaccine, if they so desired. What happened is that there was a very low demand and vaccine not being used. Allotment for those outlying areas was cut. In Ga you don't have to get the vaccine in the county that you live, so many from the large metro counties in Atlanta started checking and getting vaccinated in the surrounding more rural counties. Before we were called from Emory's waitlist, we were able to secure an appointment to get vaccinated at Publix but in Brunswick a good 5 hrs from Atlanta. We turned down that appointment and decided to wait. Furtunately Emory called the next afternoon.
 

Butlerkid

Cafe Ambassador
Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
23,197
Location
Rutledge, Tennessee
Real Name
Karen
You have to sign up for an account to view the page. :stop:
Data would not load for me...but I could move my cursor around and see numeric data by state. Colorado was doing better than Tn and other states. It appears that Tn and Alabama are about the lowest states. @menbrial

And Calif was at about 20% but my 90 year old mother has not been contacted at all....... even though she called her county health department in early January and I filled out an online form for her in early January.....
 
Joined
May 27, 2005
Messages
9,644
Location
Clearwater, Florida
I don't think we'll ever know that information with any reasonable degree of certainty. That's because even if America does eventually do ample testing, which also means doing ample contact tracing, it will happen far too late to give us the data we need to determine the rate of prevention of infection and transmission.
Mike, I think we may know a lot of this information as we dissect the data from this pandemic over the next 5-10 years. All of this will be a dream for current and future epidemiologists. We do have a way currently with antibody testing to see who may have been infected without symptoms. As we get more of this data, we should be able to extrapolate the extent of asymptomatic disease. It is estimated that certain parts of NYC have already had greater than 50% of their population infected! I would not be surprised if 30-40% of those infected with Coronavirus have no symptoms at all (yet are contagious).

My son postulated last night that this pandemic will likely inspire a whole new generation of epidemiologists. With our access to "big data", I can already imagine a great number of doctoral theses.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
19,025
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
I think we may know a lot of this information as we dissect the data from this pandemic over the next 5-10 years.
I can see how that might be true pertaining to such a distant period in time. My comments about not knowing the true information about the ability of the vaccines to prevent infection and transmission was in the context of the next couple of years.
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
2,541
Location
VA
My wife and I just received our booster Moderna jabs, and we are very thankful that our vaccinations were provided in a very timely and efficient manner.

2nd vaccination or not, I shall continue my practice of not licking doorknobs and handrails.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom