COVID-19 treatment and vaccine update thread

[Anonymous Bosch]

In other words, if your proposed public health solution = more restrictive NPIs as a means to control COVID and forced business closures, you're undeniably proposing inflicting tremendous harm upon others. Such lockdowns aren't necessarily all that inconvenient for those working upper-middle class and higher jobs, who can afford to stay living in comfortable housing and continue working remotely from home. But small businesses and the lower-income earners that work there suffer the most from mandated isolation, both mentally, physically, and especially financially. So if you're insisting upon depriving others of their ability to feed their families and keep a roof over their heads in the name of public health, they'd be justified in making the exact same statement to you.

I think I've been pretty clear from day one. I fully support/endorse making sure everyone has what they need to survive this in the short and long term. If that means paying business owners to stay home? Terrific. If that means paying restaurant owners to make food for people struggling with food insecurity? Awesome. If that means connecting people to the mental heath services they need right now? Perfect. Figure out how to pay mortgages and rent? We can do that. Address utility bills? Also possible.

It may be possible but realistically, it hasn't occurred in all the time we have been dealing with the COVID pandemic. So in an age of rampant populism, it's recklessly naive to think there's any possibility of continually mandating small business-owners and the lower-income earners they hire metaphorically take another dive into an empty swimming pool on assurances that the government will ensure water is there before they hit the bottom.

The acclaimed epidemiologist Donald Henderson put it aptly in the conclusion of the paper he wrote on Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza:

An overriding principle. Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted. Strong political and public health leadership to provide reassurance and to ensure that needed medical care services are provided are critical elements. If either is seen to be less than optimal, a manageable epidemic could move toward catastrophe.

[Smoove_B]

Right, and since that was published (2006), America continued to hollow out public health infrastructure across the United States. Underfunded and understaffed doesn't even begin to describe what's been going on for 2+ decades.

More than three-quarters of Americans live in states that spend less than $100 per person annually on public health. Spending ranges from $32 in Louisiana to $263 in Delaware, according to data provided to KHN and AP by the State Health Expenditure Dataset project.

People spend more on an annual Netflix subscription or Amazon Prime than we spend on them for public health services. It's beyond shameful.

Add in what happened at a federal level in 2016 and you have a perfect storm of variables making it exponentially worse.

It was always going to be bad - always. But it could have been so much better - orders of magnitude better. It's been almost a year and I still can't process everything and as stated earlier, have been struggling with how.

The people who spend their lives working in public health say the temporary coronavirus funds won’t fix the eroded foundation entrusted with protecting the nation’s health as thousands continue to die.

[Kraken]

I think Americans have the most freedom of any country in the world

The Human Freedom Index put us at #23 last year.

[dbt1949]

I read your site. Hong Kong is listed number one.
I don't trust your site.

[Ænima]

Perhaps your American brainwashing isn’t to be trusted either?

[Anonymous Bosch]

Right, and since that was published (2006), America continued to hollow out public health infrastructure across the United States. Underfunded and understaffed doesn't even begin to describe what's been going on for 2+ decades.

Granted, that's absolutely a factor, but historian John Barry, author of The Great Influenza (an absolute must-read if ever there was one), perfectly addresses what I was hinting at, in terms of the vital public health importance of maintaining credibility and public confidence during a pandemic, in the following piece he wrote for Smithsonian magazine:

How the Horrific 1918 Flu Spread Across America

…

Then there are the less glamorous measures, known as nonpharmaceutical interventions: hand-washing, telecommuting, covering coughs, staying home when sick instead of going to work and, if the pandemic is severe enough, widespread school closings and possibly more extreme controls. The hope is that “layering” such actions one atop another will reduce the impact of an outbreak on public health and on resources in today’s just-in-time economy. But the effectiveness of such interventions will depend on public compliance, and the public will have to trust what it is being told.

That is why, in my view, the most important lesson from 1918 is to tell the truth. Though that idea is incorporated into every preparedness plan I know of, its actual implementation will depend on the character and leadership of the people in charge when a crisis erupts.

I recall participating in a pandemic “war game” in Los Angeles involving area public health officials. Before the exercise began, I gave a talk about what happened in 1918, how society broke down, and emphasized that to retain the public’s trust, authorities had to be candid. “You don’t manage the truth,” I said. “You tell the truth.” Everyone shook their heads in agreement.

Next, the people running the game revealed the day’s challenge to the participants: A severe pandemic influenza virus was spreading around the world. It had not officially reached California, but a suspected case—the severity of the symptoms made it seem so—had just surfaced in Los Angeles. The news media had learned of it and were demanding a press conference.

The participant with the first move was a top-ranking public health official. What did he do? He declined to hold a press conference, and instead just released a statement: More tests are required. The patient might not have pandemic influenza. There is no reason for concern.

I was stunned. This official had not actually told a lie, but he had deliberately minimized the danger; whether or not this particular patient had the disease, a pandemic was coming. The official’s unwillingness to answer questions from the press or even acknowledge the pandemic’s inevitability meant that citizens would look elsewhere for answers, and probably find a lot of bad ones. Instead of taking the lead in providing credible information he instantly fell behind the pace of events. He would find it almost impossible to get ahead of them again. He had, in short, shirked his duty to the public, risking countless lives.

And that was only a game.

[Smoove_B]

We are 100% in agreement that public health officials have spent the better part of 2+ decades being invisible, unknown agents in our communities; you'll get no argument from me there. That alone has with out question impacted the arc of our current story because of the lack of trust the public has with public health officials (baseline).

The "rub' is why the profession has remained invisible. Is it because the public doesn't value what we do? Is it inherent to the profession and how we operate? Is there something about public health leaders that has them generally uninterested and uninvolved in the public spotlight? Dr. Fauci has been a public health legend since the 1980s, but has anyone outside of public health heard of him before 2020?

These are all questions the profession has been trying to grapple with over the last year. We know that some of this is on us - without question.

(and yes, the John Barry book is good. While she's been hot/cold of late, Laurie Garrett's Betrayal of Trust was a book that honestly transformed how I look at and consider public health as a field. It wasn't something I'd read until after I graduated school and it completely blew my mind how much she covered that I had no idea about.

[Jeff V]

The "rub' is why the profession has remained invisible. Is it because the public doesn't value what we do? Is it inherent to the profession and how we operate? Is there something about public health leaders that has them generally uninterested and uninvolved in the public spotlight? Dr. Fauci has been a public health legend since the 1980s, but has anyone outside of public health heard of him before 2020?

All industries have their superstars, but unless there's a reason for that industry to be in the national spotlight, chance are they'll go unknown to anyone not involved with or following that industry.

I would be all for a mandatory civics class in high school that introduces kids to public sector leaders that that might not commonly make the news.

[Anonymous Bosch]

We are 100% in agreement that public health officials have spent the better part of 2+ decades being invisible…

I'm sceptical that we are, because you seem to miss John Barry's central point and why I quoted it; when he talks about "the most important lesson from 1918," he's certainly not referring to the dangers of public health officials being invisible. And if that's all you took away from what I quoted, I would encourage you to peruse what he wrote above more carefully, because he does spell it out unambiguously and even provides a specific contextual example that perfectly illustrates the point he's making. Then again, if the example he cited is any indication, perhaps prevarication is a job requirement for those in your line of work.

[Smoove_B]

Hmm...I guess I'm mixing posts. I can't say I have experiencing with the type of lying he's talking about, but I do think it's connected to being invisible. Namely, we aren't trained to be front and center and communicating with the general public, especially during emergency events. Here, lies of omission or not using emergency management communication techniques is bad form. However, very few in my field are trained (formally or informally) on communication skills (the basics), public health communication (mind blowing) or emergency management communication (understandable, it's specialized field).

I guess my point was (is? could be?) that when you're invisible and not accustomed to constant interactions with the general public at large, miscommunication happens. I'm not convinced there's a malevolence in the majority of the communications - we're not trying to intentionally leave out information or mislead the public. Instead what you're seeing/hearing is a function of inexperience.

As a point of reference, I 2+ decades of experience, but all my health education knowledge is self taught. Not once during my undergrad or graduate education did I spent a single hour focused on health education or communication; that's a problem. It's till not something that's a focus, though the opportunity to learn is greater than when I was in school. However, it's not part of a standardized degree offering (and it should be). I guess my point with all this is that I fully acknowledge my profession (on the whole) has issues we need to resolve. We're not 100% of the problem, but ins some ways (to go back to Barry), we haven't changed our methodology, likely (in part) because something of this scale hasn't happened in 100+ years.

Hell, the academics are having the Marvel Universe equivalent of Civil War over airborne vs droplets vs aerosols right now, and it's not pretty.

[Anonymous Bosch]

I guess my point was (is? could be?) that when you're invisible and not accustomed to constant interactions with the general public at large, miscommunication happens. I'm not convinced there's a malevolence in the majority of the communications - we're not trying to intentionally leave out information or mislead the public. Instead what you're seeing/hearing is a function of inexperience.

That's a fair point and I would tend to agree. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions and nonetheless the erosive effects equivocation from public health officials have upon public trust remain just as toxic. You mentioned Fauci, and he exemplifies precisely what John Barry was getting at in terms of a public health official attempting to manage the truth rather than simply telling it (though mostly for those politically aligned with the right) as the following observations from David Marcus writing for The Federalist illustrate:

In an interview last week with The New York Times, Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted something that many of us have suspected for some time: The media-anointed, all-knowing guru of COVID has been fudging the truth in order to encourage what he views as better behavior from the American people. Put simply, Fauci has been acting less like a public official and more like a parent keeping certain truths from his children.

This quote, which has been rightfully making the rounds, really tells the whole tale. Asked why he changed his mind about how much vaccination would result in herd immunity, Fauci said, “When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent … Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,’ so I went to 80, 85. We need to have some humility here …. We really don’t know what the real number is. I think the real range is somewhere between 70 to 90 percent. But, I’m not going to say 90 percent.”

This is a problem. Fauci is clearly admitting that he was not simply telling the American people what he believed to be true, he was instead trying to manipulate us into behaving how he wants. And it’s not the first time. Back in March, Fauci told Americans not to wear masks. He now claims he did so largely because he feared a shortage. So, once again, instead of just giving us the unvarnished scientific truth, as he understood it, he told us only what he thought it was good for us to know.

[Smoove_B]

Are you sure you're not taking my class? The parens patriae nature of public health is totally a thing (right or wrong). Historic public health (I'll go with public health from the 1940s to the 1990s) is all about public health officials descending from high upon a mountain and sharing our knowledge and skills to help guide communities because we know better.

This loops back to the trust issue as well. In a perfect world (ideally what we should have been doing for the last 20+ years) is figuring out a way to take the public health information we have access to and repackaging it for easier/better communication to the general public. Here we really should be looking to give the public the same access to information we have (even if we need to assist with translating into easier to understand elements) so they can (hopefully) reach the same conclusions that we ourselves have come to after years of study and professional experience.

I think we're closer on a lot of this than maybe you realize. I hadn't seen the article you linked, so thanks for including it.

[Zarathud]

Based on how the public has reacted to everything in 2020, trusting them to be logical and responsible is not the right answer.

[Smoove_B]

Right, but part of that is also because we've long lost the credibility battle. People are more likely to believe a random Youtuber or someone on Twitter than a public health professional. That's not new to 2020 -- it's been at least a decade in the making. And the core reason goes back to visibility in the communities we serve. Online personalities and radio talking heads have more of a connection to the average person than their local health official.

[Lorini]

Right, but part of that is also because we've long lost the credibility battle. People are more likely to believe a random Youtuber or someone on Twitter than a public health professional. That's not new to 2020 -- it's been at least a decade in the making. And the core reason goes back to visibility in the communities we serve. Online personalities and radio talking heads have more of a connection to the average person than their local health official.

There were Anti Mask societies in 1919 so that's not new either. As I said in the other thread, part of the issue in my opinion is that the community who is talking is not aware of the diversity of communities they are talking to and don't know how those people live. They need people/doctors who can talk with those people as both doctors and participants in the culture. But here in LA the most diverse city outside of NY, all we hear from is white people. Many minorities have a dim view of how white people perceive their culture so the information goes in one ear and out the other. The medical/science community needs to do a lot better in this regard in my opinion.

[Smoove_B]

Yeah, but back in 1919 people in my profession would round them up and toss them in jail.

Regardless, you're absolutely correct (not that you need my confirmation here) and it's something the profession largely recognizes. Unfortunately like many other professions the upper level / management positions are still dominated by middle-aged white men (and I say this as a middle-aged white man). It's changed significantly in the last 15 or so years, but we still have a long way to go. Cultural competence is something that is supposed to be part of our profession and baked into our training, but in my experience it hasn't been. I'm but a small slice of that overall, but there's definitely recognition that our messaging needs to change.

Hell, it wasn't until after Katrina that public health and emergency management professionals realized that there wasn't any information being generated and provided to children regarding emergencies -- how to be prepared and what to do when an emergency is happening. That was only ~16 years ago!

[FishPants]

Right, but part of that is also because we've long lost the credibility battle. People are more likely to believe a random Youtuber or someone on Twitter than a public health professional. That's not new to 2020 -- it's been at least a decade in the making. And the core reason goes back to visibility in the communities we serve. Online personalities and radio talking heads have more of a connection to the average person than their local health official.

There were Anti Mask societies in 1919 so that's not new either. As I said in the other thread, part of the issue in my opinion is that the community who is talking is not aware of the diversity of communities they are talking to and don't know how those people live. They need people/doctors who can talk with those people as both doctors and participants in the culture. But here in LA the most diverse city outside of NY, all we hear from is white people. Many minorities have a dim view of how white people perceive their culture so the information goes in one ear and out the other. The medical/science community needs to do a lot better in this regard in my opinion.

I have a hard time buying into the race card argument as a de facto reason. Let me introduce Dr. Theresa Tam, Chief Public Health Officer in Canada. We still have dumb asses not wearing masks and protesting masks and lockdown orders (even though every time we lock down the numbers plummet.. hard to argue with basic math, yet simpletons going to simp).

I'd be more inclined to believe that the ignorance on display can be underlined by the cuts to public education - compounded by human nature to find an echo chamber that aligns with whatever stupid shit is convenient to them. Facebook is a perfect example of this shit.

Before Covid I was considered an extrovert, and community focused - now after a year of watching this unfold in the country, the world, and my small little rural town I have come to the realization that in general humans don't give a flying fuck about each other - and in turn I'm taking a more "let it burn and sort itself out" approach. The thought that someone won't wear a mask for 20 minutes to shop because it might actually save someone's life is brutal, and ironically the people in my community that are the worst offenders are police officers, paramedics, nurses and teachers. Freeedummb.

Not sure what my point is other than it's disheartening to see very little compassion anymore, and the soul sucking political climate of the USA and around the world in the last 4-5 years; a little natural selection is fine by me once my family is vaccinated - go ahead anti-vaxers and don't vax, the less of you around the better.

[Lorini]

Depends on where you live Fish Pants. Here in LA county nearly half the population is Latino. Only 27% of the population is white. So white messaging to a minority of the population is almost certain not to be heard by nearly half the population. And on top of that, the Latino population has been hard hit by the disease because of a couple of things. The first is the industries they are concentrated in are particularly susceptible to the spread. Tight, indoors, crowded conditions. The second is their culture is a culture of gathering. They many times live with multiple generations in one space. They have very large crowded parties, they get together at a drop of a hat, any excuse to gather. So when a white person asks them to basically change a fundamental part of who they believe they are, they didn't listen. What I'm saying is that the county needed way more Latino engagement with the communication of Covid-19, to work with the existing Latino outreach groups, and to have Latino doctors and medical people deliver the message. They did none of this, and here we are.

[hitbyambulance]

Depends on where you live Fish Pants. Here in LA county nearly half the population is Latino. Only 27% of the population is white. So white messaging to a minority of the population is almost certain not to be heard by nearly half the population. And on top of that, the Latino population has been hard hit by the disease because of a couple of things. The first is the industries they are concentrated in are particularly susceptible to the spread. Tight, indoors, crowded conditions. The second is their culture is a culture of gathering. They many times live with multiple generations in one space. They have very large crowded parties, they get together at a drop of a hat, any excuse to gather. So when a white person asks them to basically change a fundamental part of who they believe they are, they didn't listen. What I'm saying is that the county needed way more Latino engagement with the communication of Covid-19, to work with the existing Latino outreach groups, and to have Latino doctors and medical people deliver the message. They did none of this, and here we are.

article from today on the Muckleshoot tribe messaging efforts: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... -approach/

A survey of 1,435 Native Americans across 46 states found that 75% of participants would be willing to receive a vaccine. The findings could help inform public-health campaigns geared toward Native Americans in rural and urban settings, said Abigail Echo-Hawk, director of the institute, which is the research division of the Seattle Indian Health Board.

Still, typical campaigns on coronavirus precautions and vaccination have focused on individual decisions — messaging that does not resonate with Native American communities, even though they often have worse outcomes from the disease, Echo-Hawk said.

“The rest of the nation should be looking at the Native community, the messaging, and community cohesiveness that we have about making these decisions on behalf of an entire community,” Echo-Hawk said.

[Jaymann]

My daughter works in a hospital and they offered family members over 65 the ability to make a vaccine (Moderna) appointment, so I jumped on it. So I'm confirmed for...wait for it ('cause I certainly am)...March 11.

[FishPants]

Depends on where you live Fish Pants. Here in LA county nearly half the population is Latino. Only 27% of the population is white. So white messaging to a minority of the population is almost certain not to be heard by nearly half the population. And on top of that, the Latino population has been hard hit by the disease because of a couple of things. The first is the industries they are concentrated in are particularly susceptible to the spread. Tight, indoors, crowded conditions. The second is their culture is a culture of gathering. They many times live with multiple generations in one space. They have very large crowded parties, they get together at a drop of a hat, any excuse to gather. So when a white person asks them to basically change a fundamental part of who they believe they are, they didn't listen. What I'm saying is that the county needed way more Latino engagement with the communication of Covid-19, to work with the existing Latino outreach groups, and to have Latino doctors and medical people deliver the message. They did none of this, and here we are.

I don't disagree there are demographics harder hit, there's not argument there. But I do disagree with your root cause being a white person delivering it - to be a bit provocative, are you saying the Latino community is unable to understand basic science because a white person delivers it? We have similar cultural issues in the Toronto area (well Toronto in general which is high density period), but also in the burbs such as Brampton which has a very high Indian/Sikh population that commonly has multiple generations in a single home -- and the health authority for the region actually had to abandon contact tracing in that area largely because it was impossible. Now all of that being said, they were still able to understand the science and directives from Tam whom originated in China.

So while I don't disagree there's mis trust in your region/country, and I don't doubt it for a second - stepping out a bit further it comes down to critical thinking and understanding which in my opinion is delivered via education. If you control education, you control the people - and I think we are probably arguing both on the same sides - the same communities that are experiencing these high numbers are also typically not able to afford higher ed and break the cycle.

Anyhow it's an interesting discussion, and I acknowledge I'm pretty apathetic these days - or maybe just all around f'ing fed up with the general public at large. Around these parts, the average window licking mask denying asshole is white anyhow (and also a dipshit).

[hitbyambulance]

surprising interim efficacy data on Gamelaya Institute's Gam-COVID-Vac

Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine has 91.6% efficacy against symptomatic coronavirus, interim trial results have suggested.

The preliminary findings are based on analysis of data from more than 20,000, mostly white, adults, three-quarters of whom received the vaccine. The remainder received a placebo.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... l-suggests

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2A21IT

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanc ... 8/fulltext

this is from a Russian news source, so maybe a grain of salt with this one:

The Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, the developer of Sputnik V, expects the duration of immunity provided by the vaccine will be over two years, Alexander Gintsburg, head of the center, told a press conference on Tuesday.

https://tass.com/science/1251837

[Max Peck]

I trust the published trial results for the Russian vaccine as much as I trust the published results for the Chinese vaccine.

[hitbyambulance]

how about those shifty shady Oxford/AstraZeneca peeps?

Oxford coronavirus vaccine shows sustained protection of 76% during the 3-month interval until the second dose

* Analyses reveal single standard dose efficacy from day 22 to day 90 post vaccination of 76% with protection not falling in this three-month period
* After the second dose vaccine efficacy from two standard doses is 82.4% with the 3-month interval being used in the UK. (82.4% effective, with a 95% confidence interval of 62.7% - 91.7% at 12+ weeks)
* Data supports the 4-12 week prime-boost dosing interval recommended by many global regulators
* Analyses of PCR positive swabs in UK population suggests vaccine may have substantial effect on transmission of the virus with 67% reduction in positive swabs among those vaccinated

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-02-02-ox ... h-interval

they were really boastful in the first half of 2020 about their vaccine candidate - i'm thinking they're not feeling too great the mRNA vaccines (and even one or two of the others) bested their efficacy results. there's an ulterior reason they're doing the combined vaccine study with Gamaleya.

[hitbyambulance]

Vaxart's phase I results of its oral vaccine candidate VXA-CoV2-1 are .... too early to tell:

The vast majority of COVID-19 vaccines on the market or in development are administered through an injection, but South San Francisco-based Vaxart is attempting to develop an oral vaccine. This morning, the company released preliminary data that showed its medication was well-tolerated and generated an immunogenic response.

Despite that seemingly positive news, share prices have plunged more than 50% in premarket trading. And that may be due to the fact that neutralizing antibodies were not discovered in patients who took the preventative medication. However, the company said its vaccine candidate VXA-CoV2-1 triggered multiple immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 antigens, including CD8+ cytotoxic T-cell response to the viral Spike (S) protein. This response is necessary for long-lasting cross-reactive immunity, the company said. Vaxart added the T-cell response is higher than it has seen in any previous Vaxart clinical trial.

https://www.biospace.com/article/vaxart ... ovid-news/

[dbt1949]

Oooooooooooo....T-virus.

[hitbyambulance]

Canada moves quickly - already gave emergency use authorization to Janssen/J&J and Novavax.

[hitbyambulance]

Interim analysis of data from the University of Oxford studies of the ChAdOx1 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) vaccine suggested that lengthening the interval between vaccination doses was associated with increases in the clinical efficacy. The efficacy after the second dose was 82% with an interval of 12+ week between doses, compared to 55% with <6 weeks. Antibody responses were more than twice as high after a 12+ week interval between doses compared to <6 weeks among those who were 18-55 years old. Reduced viral shedding among vaccinated participants suggests a potential for reduced transmissibility.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... EifQ%3D%3D

[Max Peck]

Canada moves quickly - already gave emergency use authorization to Janssen/J&J and Novavax.

Do you have a source for that? I haven't seen any announcements about either vaccine being approved for use yet.

[Max Peck]

Truly, Canada is the worst country, tapping into a vaccine supply under the terms of the agreement we made when we funded the supply.

Canada defends taking vaccines from scheme for poor

Canada has defended its decision to draw on a supply of coronavirus vaccines from a global inoculation-sharing initiative known as Covax.

Covax pools funds from wealthier countries to help buy vaccines for themselves and low-income nations.

The scheme has announced a plan to deliver more than 330 million vaccine doses in the first half of 2021.

Canada is the only member of the G7 group of rich countries listed as a Covax beneficiary at this stage.

Other wealthier countries, including New Zealand and Singapore, have requested an early allocation as well.

Most of the first doses available, though, will be delivered to low- and middle-income countries.

Many of those countries haven't even started vaccinations. Meanwhile, Canada has vaccinated 2.29% of its population with one dose, including 48% of health workers, government data shows.

Aside from Covax, agreements for 398 million doses of vaccines have been struck by the Canadian government - more than enough to cover the country's population of 37 million.

[FishPants]

Canada moves quickly - already gave emergency use authorization to Janssen/J&J and Novavax.

Not sure what you read but that's wrong. J&J is still "any day now" (been hearing that shit for awhile) and Novavax was announced as a partnership to start making it in Canada, with construction of the facility completing July/August time frame.

I do not use the words "quickly" nor "competently" when speaking of the Canadian vaccination program, it's embarrassingly bad at all levels from my viewpoint in Ontario. Our PM is a dolt, our Premier is a dolt - it's sad when I'm hoping America gets their shit sorted out and the private clinics offer up vaccines so I can just drive to Buffalo and get it (I will not queue jump Americans though, I'm talking when their program seems to have levelled out).

[Max Peck]

Ford has actually outperformed my expectations. For a guy who was trending toward being Trump North, he's been pretty sane during the pandemic.

[FishPants]

Ford has actually outperformed my expectations. For a guy who was trending toward being Trump North, he's been pretty sane during the pandemic.

I was the same until he started fucking over small businesses. There's absolutely no reason why I should be able to walk into Walmart and buy clothes when clothing stores are forced shut. I like the Quebec model, the products that are essential can be sold by anyone - the rest of it needs to be purchased online/curbside.

Also the "teasing" of announcements ("When you see the statistics on Monday, you will fall off your chair!".. I was literally yelling at the TV "Then fucking tell us now, and deal with it now"). It's weird as hell that his administration continues to tease announcements.

Also closing the vaccine clinics over the holidays was pretty stupid too. And him going to his cottage when he told everyone to stay at home and not go to cottages. Also his staff travelling over the holidays with the stay at home order. Or the indoors restriction to immediate family, and then he hosted extended family in his home.

Yeah alright, I'm just turning into a grumpy old man lol.

[Anonymous Bosch]

Ford has actually outperformed my expectations. For a guy who was trending toward being Trump North, he's been pretty sane during the pandemic.

I was the same until he started fucking over small businesses. There's absolutely no reason why I should be able to walk into Walmart and buy clothes when clothing stores are forced shut. I like the Quebec model, the products that are essential can be sold by anyone - the rest of it needs to be purchased online/curbside.

Also the "teasing" of announcements ("When you see the statistics on Monday, you will fall off your chair!".. I was literally yelling at the TV "Then fucking tell us now, and deal with it now"). It's weird as hell that his administration continues to tease announcements.

Also closing the vaccine clinics over the holidays was pretty stupid too. And him going to his cottage when he told everyone to stay at home and not go to cottages. Also his staff travelling over the holidays with the stay at home order. Or the indoors restriction to immediate family, and then he hosted extended family in his home.

Yeah alright, I'm just turning into a grumpy old man lol.

I, for one, salute your Canuckian cantankerousity.

[hitbyambulance]

Canada moves quickly - already gave emergency use authorization to Janssen/J&J and Novavax.

Not sure what you read but that's wrong. J&J is still "any day now" (been hearing that shit for awhile) and Novavax was announced as a partnership to start making it in Canada, with construction of the facility completing July/August time frame.

Wikipedia was wrong!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine

[gilraen]

My dad is 70 and is eligible to get the vaccine. I asked him if he would, he said he doesn't trust the new mRNA one and will wait for the adenovirus one. Oh well, I'm not going to insist. He is retired now (got laid off last summer and decided it was as good a time as any to "retire"), he's at home all day, my mother works from home, and they don't go to restaurants or anywhere public, other than the occasional store (and they are good about wearing masks).

I keep seeing threads on NextDoor about people trying to find vaccine appointments in the area, though. It sounds...messy. Between several major hospital systems, everyone seems to have their own ways to maintain an appointment list, and people are messaging each other with the secret "time" each day that a new online block of appointment times might open up.

I'm half convinced that by the time I become eligible for any vaccine, the variants will be the dominant form of the virus, and the vaccine will need to be reformulated.

[hitbyambulance]

My dad is 70 and is eligible to get the vaccine. I asked him if he would, he said he doesn't trust the new mRNA one and will wait for the adenovirus one.

i get the strong feeling that local governments are working to try to erase any sort of choice in this, and until the CDC comes out with guidelines or recommendations, they're trying to play them off as all the same and 'what's available is what you will get'. we will see how this plays out in mid-2021 - what happens when multiple vaccines are available, with efficacies ranging from 70-94%? i personally would be fine with any (maybe even the Chinese and Russian developed ones as well), but watch the fits get pitched if distant rural communities only get the J&J while metro areas get Pfizer and Moderna. it's going to go from ca. early 2020 'the virus is a hoax!' to '70%? we're being discriminated against!'

[Max Peck]

Canada moves quickly - already gave emergency use authorization to Janssen/J&J and Novavax.

Not sure what you read but that's wrong. J&J is still "any day now" (been hearing that shit for awhile) and Novavax was announced as a partnership to start making it in Canada, with construction of the facility completing July/August time frame.

Wikipedia was wrong!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine

Look at the table/column headers that you didn't include in your screenshot. They are vaccine candidates that are pending authorization.

[hitbyambulance]

yes, i misread that.

[noxiousdog]

My apologies but the thread is really long and I haven't had the opportunity to fully read it, so this may have been covered.

@dbt1949 - the vaccine... While it will protect you directly it is also designed to stop the spread. If you are interested, there are lots of contagion simulations on YouTube which show how things can spread exponentially. The more people that are protected, the less likely it is to spread on public. When our numbers as a while are less, then things can more approximate normal. This is absolutely essential sure to variant spread. We have to get things under control.

In other news, there's a big breakthrough in treatment.

"Researchers engineer a tiny antibody capable of neutralizing the coronavirus"

Obviously early and more research is necessary, but really promising.