Octopus Overlords

My parents were able to get appointments to get the first Moderna shot at a facility in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Being under 65, I wasn't able to get an appointment. But a doctor in my family recommended that I go with my parents and ask if I could be vaccinated without an appointment, since they could have spare doses from appointment cancelations.

So I drove with my parents to the facility, 1.5 hours away. Luckily, they did give me the shot. The facility was well-staffed and very efficient and friendly.

If you've got family members who are getting the vaccine, it may be worth it to go with them and see if they're willing to vaccinate you as well.

Brother and his wife in NY just got appointments for their first shots in early March. Guess that just leaves me in the family without the vaccine. Stupid South Carolina.

Yeah, but it greatly reduces your chances, too. You'll have to catch it on your own - nobody will be bringing it home to you.

Blackhawk wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:47 am Yeah, but it greatly reduces your chances, too. You'll have to catch it on your own - nobody will be bringing it home to you.

Although it seems likely, we're not yet sure that's the case.

Defiant wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:52 am

Blackhawk wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:47 am Yeah, but it greatly reduces your chances, too. You'll have to catch it on your own - nobody will be bringing it home to you.

Although it seems likely, we're not yet sure that's the case.

I saw news of a study over the weekend that indicated that it does seem to be the case. Smoove will have to chime in, but the confidence level on this seems to have risen considerably lately.

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:04 am I saw news of a study over the weekend that indicated that it does seem to be the case. Smoove will have to chime in, but the confidence level on this seems to have risen considerably lately.

From what I understand, the studies suggest a 75-90% decrease in such transmissions and haven't been peer reviewed.

Defiant wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:12 am

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:04 am I saw news of a study over the weekend that indicated that it does seem to be the case. Smoove will have to chime in, but the confidence level on this seems to have risen considerably lately.

From what I understand, the studies suggest a 75-90% decrease in such transmissions and haven't been peer reviewed.

True on the peer review piece. But at least we're starting to see actual studies.

"Do COVID vaccines stop infections or just make you less sick? We’re starting to get answers – Fortune" https://fortune.com/2021/02/19/do-covid ... ccine/amp/

And this is all assuming we'll get back to the point any time when I'll get to see them again. Since we all live in different states, we only usually get together a few times a year. There has been some talk about at least some of us getting together for Passosver (in late March/early April), at which point everyone but me should be fully vaccinated. However, I don't have a good sense yet how safe that would be for me or others, especially my older parents.

Are we talking confidence that the vaccines prevent people from being carriers of the OG virus or also the variant ones?

Given that the vaccines aren't as effective at preventing infection by variants, but they do prevent more severe symptoms, I'd expect there should be concern that some vaccinated people could be asymptomatic carriers for variants. I don't know if that edge case is at all significant in terms of containing spread, but as someone who won't be vaccinated until late fall or early winter, I'd not be inclined to stop taking precautions around vaccinated people just yet.

Wow. That went way beyond what I intended. I should have said 'less likely' instead of 'won't', and I thought it was a reference to household family, but it's early. I certainly didn't suggest not taking precautions.

All I meant was that if everybody else in your household has been vaccinated except you, you're safer than if they weren't.

Blackhawk wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:27 am Wow. That went way beyond what I intended. I should have said 'less likely' instead of 'won't', and I thought it was a reference to household family, but it's early. I certainly didn't suggest not taking precautions.

All I meant was that if everybody else in your household has been vaccinated except you, you're safer than if they weren't.

Uh-huh, this. I don't think anyone in this thread is advocating freedom from precautions based on others being vaccinated in Feb 2021.

Yeah, I was just thinking out loud. Through my fingers...

The extent that vaccination for the OG virus allows for asymptomatic spread of variants feels interesting to me, probably because we're expecting the B117 variant to be dominant here by the end of March or so, last I heard, but I haven't seen any discussion or reporting related to it.

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:42 am Brother and his wife in NY just got appointments for their first shots in early March. Guess that just leaves me in the family without the vaccine. Stupid South Carolina.

I kind of wonder if things won't start picking up for us now that CVS/Publix and the like are going to start offering shots. I'm part of manufacturing and am supposed to be eligible in 1b, but have no idea when we'll actually get to that point.

stessier wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:49 am

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:42 am Brother and his wife in NY just got appointments for their first shots in early March. Guess that just leaves me in the family without the vaccine. Stupid South Carolina.

I kind of wonder if things won't start picking up for us now that CVS/Publix and the like are going to start offering shots. I'm part of manufacturing and am supposed to be eligible in 1b, but have no idea when we'll actually get to that point.

Locally, that's the case and Biden came to Michigan touting availability at Meijer/CVS. That is great for the breadth of distribution but it's not increasing the overall pace. I'm still projected as starting availability in May as high risk, my parents still aren't vaccinated though they have tecnically been eligible since Jan 11, and the general populace is still predicted as August.

From what I hear, the big thing that is positive about Meijer/CVS is if you are eligible, you can actually get registered. Oddly, CVS can do it efficiently but Aetna can't and the hospital systems that accept Aetna can't. It almost makes you wonder why they were sidelined so long but it does make me happy that they/we seem to have found a system better than state, counties, and hospital systems whom have failed since they began in December and have yet to improve at any level for whatever reasons.

stessier wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:49 am

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:42 am Brother and his wife in NY just got appointments for their first shots in early March. Guess that just leaves me in the family without the vaccine. Stupid South Carolina.

I kind of wonder if things won't start picking up for us now that CVS/Publix and the like are going to start offering shots. I'm part of manufacturing and am supposed to be eligible in 1b, but have no idea when we'll actually get to that point.

CVS allows you to see all the stores in the state with available vaccines. I can't schedule one since I'm not eligible yet (at the pharmacy, at least, it requires you to be 65+, healthcare worker, or law enforcement), but there were a surprisingly high number of stores with available appointments. This is in contrast to my brother in NY who checked CVS and every store in his state was booked.

edit: all this is to say there certainly seems to be more vaccine available in SC than eligible people who are rushing to get it.

Network television would have me believe that everyone in NY is a cop or a lawyer.

I think you're forgetting the prostitutes.

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:53 am I think you're forgetting the prostitutes.

And drug dealers. Have to keep those other two groups busy somehow.

Now that my mom has gotten her vaccine, we're tentatively planning to visit her in Illinois sometime in March. It's been more than a year since the last time we saw her in person, and she's not getting any younger.

Now I'm struggling with whether to drive or fly. Driving is probably safer, although it means stopping at a hotel somewhere somewhere in Ohio. Theoretically I could drive the 14+ hours in one day, but I'd be extremely tired for the last few hours.

Apparently flying is safer than you'd think, since airplanes have very good air filtration and circulation systems. But I have no idea what the crowds are like in the terminals.

AWS260 wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:38 pm Apparently flying is safer than you'd think, since airplanes have very good air filtration and circulation systems. But I have no idea what the crowds are like in the terminals.

I flew a few months ago and a coworker just got back from flying last week. Now this is in South Florida that is seeing tons of air travel right now, but it is not nearly as crowded as normal. Some carriers are still not booking middle seats, so you may want to look into the ones that are doing that. I know that Delta is but not sure who else. So fewer flyers and smaller plane loads does make the terminal situation much less crowded. Everyone is masked and there is some decent separation, but you will be within 3-6 feet of masked people almost the entire time.

On the plane, the air quality is still better than ever, but you risk flying with someone that is transmitting. Double masking with a face shield is the way to go (I wore protective glasses). Only you can determine your level of comfort. I would not fly for a vacation, but would probably do so for family.

FWIW hotels don't seem especially dangerous to me. You could always book a place that has units with doors facing the outdoors (roadside motel type), so your only contact would be like 5 minutes in the lobby checking in (when you could have a KN95 or double-mask on).

There is also bathroom / rest stops to consider too, though for the most part you could do those quickly and masked.

stessier wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:59 am

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:53 am I think you're forgetting the prostitutes.

And drug dealers. Have to keep those other two groups busy somehow.

I thought those were always from New Jersey.

Remember, surfaces are a minor concern compared to face-to-face contact. Hotels seem like your best bet (short of car camping, which is what I'd probably do.) If you're worried, bring along a can of disinfectant spray and your own set of sheets and pillow. Rent the room, change the sheets, hose the place down, and take a stroll for a little while. That's still probably overkill.

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:42 am Brother and his wife in NY just got appointments for their first shots in early March. Guess that just leaves me in the family without the vaccine. Stupid South Carolina.

I feel like Alanis would be able to write another verse about me being unable to schedule an appointment for mine.

Smoove_B wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:43 pm

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:42 am Brother and his wife in NY just got appointments for their first shots in early March. Guess that just leaves me in the family without the vaccine. Stupid South Carolina.

I feel like Alanis would be able to write another verse about me being unable to schedule an appointment for mine.

Isn't it ironic?

Jag wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:53 pm

Smoove_B wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:43 pm

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:42 am Brother and his wife in NY just got appointments for their first shots in early March. Guess that just leaves me in the family without the vaccine. Stupid South Carolina.

I feel like Alanis would be able to write another verse about me being unable to schedule an appointment for mine.

Isn't it ironic?

A little too ironic.

Probably the best overview I've seen of all the current data on how vaccines do or do not reduce transmission.

Paging Señor Smoove for postulation.

I read

Paging Señor Smoove for prostitution.

And had to go back and wonder why you didn't say Señora or Señorita

Classic epidemiology study design. Of note at the bottom:

There are some caveats. The data from England and from Israel comes from observational studies, not randomized controlled trials: If the people who’d been vaccinated differ from people who haven’t, the study’s assumptions might not hold. Researchers do their best to adjust for this, but any adjustment will be imperfect.

This is the first step though - conducting an observational study. Ideally now they are going to move on to a clinical trial and see if the observation holds.

In addition, getting the vaccine could change behavior — they might take more risks, and they might be less likely to seek Covid-19 testing or be required to provide negative test results.

This is what we refer to as confounding - it's a factor that isn't accounted for that's modifying the outcome. Again, controlled with study design.

So yes, definitely encouraging, but it's not data on the same level as what's been generated (for example) to get the vaccines through the EUA. The study from Israel was being discussed online over the weekend and I think people really just want to see the data, but it also sounds encouraging.

So far the biggest vaccination discussion point I'm seeing is how we can convince more people to take it, mainly because the message (right now) that people are hearing is that your life won't change after vaccination - so what's the point? If these types of studies can move that bar by demonstrating (scientifically) that not only are you protected but we now know that you're absolutely protecting other, maybe that will help. Because if there's one thing I've learned over the last year is that people are really motivated to change their behaviors knowing it benefits someone else.

That about matches my read. Thanks. I don't think we should take this as 'open season' indication for those who are fully vaccinated (until we have multiple controlled peer-reviewed studies published), but it does seem like the worst-case outcome is likely to be that those vaccinated are substantially less likely to transmit the virus to others, and that message is worth sending.

Exactly how much less likely seems to be what is still up for debate.

Also, don't most vaccines reduce spread, not just symptoms? I just ask because that's my vague understanding, which suggests that our prior going into these studies should be that the vaccines probably do reduce spread, which makes this study more likely to be true (though still needing further study).

your life won't change after vaccination - so what's the point?

That's kind of what I'm thinking right now.
I'm on a list (supposedly) to get the shot and I will get it if called, but other wise I'm not too sure it's worth it.

El Guapo wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:20 pm Also, don't most vaccines reduce spread, not just symptoms? I just ask because that's my vague understanding, which suggests that our prior going into these studies should be that the vaccines probably do reduce spread, which makes this study more likely to be true (though still needing further study).

From the article I posted above, the answer was yes, most vaccines do significantly reduce spread, with some exceptions (eg whooping cough).

dbt1949 wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:22 pm

your life won't change after vaccination - so what's the point?

That's kind of what I'm thinking right now.
I'm on a list (supposedly) to get the shot and I will get it if called, but other wise I'm not too sure it's worth it.

And this is exactly why this sort of messaging improvement is important.

El Guapo wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:20 pm Also, don't most vaccines reduce spread, not just symptoms? I just ask because that's my vague understanding, which suggests that our prior going into these studies should be that the vaccines probably do reduce spread, which makes this study more likely to be true (though still needing further study).

Most do, but given that this is the first vaccination for a coronavirus, I don't think they wanted to assume it would hold true. However, the early data suggests it's true.

dbt1949 wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:22 pm That's kind of what I'm thinking right now. I'm on a list (supposedly) to get the shot and I will get it if called, but other wise I'm not too sure it's worth it.

Vaccinations are arguably the greatest development of the last 150+ years. Not only do they benefit you, but in most cases they benefit the community you live in as well. Remember, there are going to be people that for various reasons cannot be vaccinated. By you vaccinating yourself you're acting as a barrier to spread and helping to protect them. It really should be more widely communicated as there's nothing I can provide that's equivalent in medicine or public health. It's hard to convince people to stop smoking, wear a seat belt or exercise - the benefits are largely (and directly) individual. There are greater indirect benefits, but they get fuzzy to explain. For vaccinations there's a direct benefit to you and to others when you choose to get vaccinated. The value there is tremendous.

Zaxxon wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:38 pm

El Guapo wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:20 pm Also, don't most vaccines reduce spread, not just symptoms? I just ask because that's my vague understanding, which suggests that our prior going into these studies should be that the vaccines probably do reduce spread, which makes this study more likely to be true (though still needing further study).

From the article I posted above, the answer was yes, most vaccines do significantly reduce spread, with some exceptions (eg whooping cough).

I haven't read the article so maybe this was addressed there, but I recall hearing that one of the reasons they weren't saying it would reduce spread was because the first vaccines were mRNA vaccines, and since those are new they weren't entirely sure how they'd work.

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:43 pm

Zaxxon wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:38 pm

El Guapo wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:20 pm Also, don't most vaccines reduce spread, not just symptoms? I just ask because that's my vague understanding, which suggests that our prior going into these studies should be that the vaccines probably do reduce spread, which makes this study more likely to be true (though still needing further study).

From the article I posted above, the answer was yes, most vaccines do significantly reduce spread, with some exceptions (eg whooping cough).

I haven't read the article so maybe this was addressed there, but I recall hearing that one of the reasons they weren't saying it would reduce spread was because the first vaccines were mRNA vaccines, and since those are new they weren't entirely sure how they'd work.

Absolutely. One of the take-aways for me was that the messaging is often still on the 'we don't know whether transmission is reduced' track, and stops there. While we are now in a world where 'we don't know by how much transmission is reduced, but it would be absolutely shocking if it's not significantly reduced' is the state of play. We started with no data, and now we have not-yet-enough-to-be-definitive-and-quantitative, but enough to be confident that there is a significant reduction in transmission. I'm still hearing the former from the docs in my family, which is one of the reasons I wanted to vet this piece through Smoove.

That seemed to be the take of all of the experts interviewed in the Vox piece, at least.

To pop in some good news, our hospital announced hitting the 50,000 vaccine milestone today. It's a small blip in the national bucket, but it's a big local success story.

I got my second dose of Pfizer on Monday. Exactly 24 hours later, it kicked my ass. Headache, insane chills and fever, but 12 hours later, it's gone. Well worth it, IMHO.

dbt1949 wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:22 pm

your life won't change after vaccination - so what's the point?

That's kind of what I'm thinking right now.
I'm on a list (supposedly) to get the shot and I will get it if called, but other wise I'm not too sure it's worth it.

1. You will be far, far less likely to die of a disease that will give you a miserable, lonely death, or to survive and suffer serious symptoms for the rest of your life.
2. You will be (it seems) less likely to accidentally kill or disable other people around you by spreading it to them if you get it

No, you won't be going to unmasked orgies (or restaurants) any time soon, but those two things seem like big enough changes to be clambering for a place in line.