Update on a vaccine

[CloneGuy8]

 

[madguy30]

Which medical expert would have to tell you their 'math' has determined that the vaccine is beneficial before you would take it?

I can't pinpoint which one but an actual medical expert is a good start.

 

[Ozclone]

Well, we'll never know until it's far too late. Because they don't bother with any long-term effects of vaccines. The safety studies are very tightly controlled because they want a certain outcome. And they have a universal exemption from any potential harm, so why would they bother?

If you wait until absolute certainty that there are no long term effects that are years in the making, the current virus will have wreaked its havoc and we'll be on to the next virus wreaking its havoc while we wait to be certain that there are no long term effects from the vaccine for it. All medicine has risks, the probability and severity of those risks has to be weighed against the probability and severity of the risks associated with not using it. We don't know the long term effects of Covid either, but it looks like there are going to be some significant ones, and I am confident that the short term effects, like death, are worse than any of the vaccines that will make it through testing.

 

[CloneJD]

[

If you wait until absolute certainty that there are no long term effects that are years in the making, the current virus will have wreaked its havoc and we'll be on to the next virus wreaking its havoc while we wait to be certain that there are no long term effects from the vaccine for it. All medicine has risks, the probability and severity of those risks has to be weighed against the probability and severity of the risks associated with not using it. We don't know the long term effects of Covid either, but it looks like there are going to be some significant ones, and I am confident that the short term effects, like death, are worse than any of the vaccines that will make it through testing.

This makes sense if it is only targeted to most at risk groups initially rather than the public at large.

I'm hesitant to use a vaccine that hasn't gone through the full phase 3 protocol (maybe a year of observation?). I'm healthy and would rather have the virus than the vaccine until we get to that one year observation point. I also have reason to believe I may have already had it.

 

[CloneJD]

Merck CEO says raising COVID-19 vaccine hopes 'a grave disservice' - report

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-h...hopes-a-grave-disservice-report-idUKKCN24F2S4

 

[Ozclone]

[


This makes sense if it is only targeted to most at risk groups initially rather than the public at large.

I'm hesitant to use a vaccine that hasn't gone through the full phase 3 protocol (maybe a year of observation?). I'm healthy and would rather have the virus than the vaccine until we get to that one year observation point. I also have reason to believe I may have already had it.

Seeing as how there have been deaths in all demographic groups, that seems a little arrogant. And a little selfish unless you factor in the people that you transmit it to while you are toughing it out.

 

[CloneJD]

Seeing as how there have been deaths in all demographic groups, that seems a little arrogant. And a little selfish unless you factor in the people that you transmit it to while you are toughing it out.

Is it? They will be rationing the vaccine at first and I'm guessing middle aged healthy male in Iowa won't be on the first of the list.

It will be years before enough doses are available to the public at large.Give it to grandma first. I'll take it fall of 2021 if it's readily available.

 

[Ozclone]

Is it? They will be rationing the vaccine at first and I'm guessing middle aged healthy male in Iowa won't be on the first of the list.

It will be years before enough doses are available to the public at large.Give it to grandma first. I'll take it fall of 2021 if it's readily available.

It is. Global pandemic vaccine capacity is in excess of 6 billion doses a year with the US already locking up a disproportionate quantity. It won't be years, more like a couple months so even though there will be probably be rationing in the first weeks, supply shouldn't be an issue. Taken on a case by case basis, one person isn't going to make a difference, so it doesn't seem selfish, but if enough people only think of the impact on themselves.....

 

[CloneJD]

It is. Global pandemic vaccine capacity is in excess of 6 billion doses a year with the US already locking up a disproportionate quantity. It won't be years, more like a couple months so even though there will be probably be rationing in the first weeks, supply shouldn't be an issue. Taken on a case by case basis, one person isn't going to make a difference, so it doesn't seem selfish, but if enough people only think of the impact on themselves.....

A couple of months? You are setting yourself up for massive disappointment. Manufacture and distribution are massive challenges (are you aware at what temperatures mRNA vaccines must be shipped)?. Even when approved, distribution will be tiered and I will be a low tier:

From the Moderna man himself:

As for distribution, which poses its own challenges during a pandemic, Bancel said a partnership with the government would be “very important" under an emergency authorization from the FDA. The government, not a company, should prioritize early shipments and decide who gets the first vaccinations, he told analysts. Early on, Bancel expects “very tight supply,” while “traditional channels” of distribution would take over after some time.

https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma...cing-commercial-covid-19-vaccines-at-risk-ceo

From US officials:

How vaccines are distributed within a country will vary. Last week, U.S. officials said they were developing a tiered system for that. The system would likely prioritize groups at greatest risk of severe complications from COVID-19 and key workers.

https://abc7chicago.com/coronavirus-vaccine-update-status-covid-19-africa/6268050/

Agencies such as CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO) are racing to plan for that possibility. Ahead of last week’s meeting, a subgroup of CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) borrowed from a plan made for scarce pandemic influenza vaccines and developed a rough, five-tier scheme for the United States. The top tier includes 12 million people referred to as “critical health care and other workers,” with the first doses going to a subset of these people who are the “highest risk medical, national security, and other essential workers,” CDC’s Sarah Mbaeyi explained.

Tiers two and three would include 110 million people who also work in health care and other essential jobs, or are in these groups: 65 and older, living in long-term care facilities, or those with medical conditions known to increase the risk of developing severe COVID-19. The final two tiers would somehow preferentially allocate vaccine to the “general population” of 206 million people.

WHO on 18 June laid out its own rough “strategic allocation.” It would give priority to nearly 2 billion people, lumping together “healthcare system workers,” adults older than 65 or as young as 30 if they are at higher COVID-19 risk because they have comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, or chronic respiratory disease.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/line-forming-covid-19-vaccine-who-should-be-front

Maybe you should wait until medical professionals recommend I receive a vaccine before labeling me "selfish". Being among the first to take it would rob someone who needs it more than me.

 

[madguy30]

I'd prefer the at risk groups get it first.

Question: I tried looking at the vaccine trials...for anyone that's filled it out, if you have antibodies, are you disqualified?

I've considered doing it...although it would require me to throw myself into higher risk situations for contracting it, which means being around people, which I hate doing in normal times.