Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Coronavirus (Covid-19) informational thread
- Thread starter yaxomoxay
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apologies if this was already posted or discussed [I didn’t read all the previous postings.]
Masking is now being advised regardless of being vaccinated:
www.washingtonpost.com
*****************
Also, I just purchased N95’s a month back, it looks like Amazon is now removing certain types of mask for medical professionals again.
Masking is now being advised regardless of being vaccinated:
CDC urges vaccinated people in covid hot spots to resume wearing masks indoors
The recommendation will change guidance by the agency in May saying that vaccinated individuals did not have to wear masks indoors or out because of protection afforded by vaccines.
www.washingtonpost.com
*****************
Also, I just purchased N95’s a month back, it looks like Amazon is now removing certain types of mask for medical professionals again.
The Affordable Care Act already allows insurance companies to charge 50% more for insurance premiums of smokers over non-smokers. I think something along those lines for a COVID vaccine would be a good idea as well. It's inevitable that responsible people have to carry the irresponsible to some extent, but it shouldn't be a blanket immunity. Admittedly it's a slippery-slope, but I think the extremes should be tackled and not shied away from, since you have a responsibility to society's well being as well as your own, especially when it comes to something as easy to do as get a vaccine.
You are comparing to different things (in my opinion). IF that's the case, then should we charge higher rates for all preventable diseases? (obesity, diabetes, etc). What happened to ones bodily autonomy? Like you said its a slippery slope...now a experimental vaccine tomorrow an experimental medical device or treatment.
A very slippery slope.
I like to run and it provides lots of cardiovascular benefits. But running in congested cities could mean inhaling large volumes of polluted air.
There may be all kinds of risks engaging in sports or activities, like hiking, where coverage could be denied. Every year, we have some number of hikers in the White Mountains (NH) who get lost or can't return back because of weather and they have some device where they can call for help. There is a significant cost and risk to finding these people and then getting them to medical care. Sometimes they charge the person and sometimes they don't.
What if you don't have a working smoke detector in your home? Does that mean your homeowner's insurance doesn't cover you? We are required to have a fire extinguisher in our home by our HOA. So I went out and bought one but there was no verification done. Does insurance say you're not covered if you have a fire?
The idea of withholding coverage is satisfying but I'm not sure that it's good policy.
I would hope as time passes more people become willing. We saw this happen initially, however there does seem to be a sizable population who has zero interest and the inherent benefits of the vaccine are not enough to sway them- whether it be some religious view, anti-science/pharma/medicine stance, or low healthcare literacy. Some states seem to be plateauing, others have plateaued but seem to be picking up again. I am somewhat optimistic most hesitant people will follow through eventually, but whether or not that happens fast enough before a new strain crops up is another matter.
The way the media and some politicians and agencies make the current COVID situation sound dire. It’s true there is an increase in cases (overall) and hospitalizations (mainly unvaccinated)… it could certainly become unmanageable but presently in the overwhelming majority of the country it’s far from where we were last winter. Deaths are still quite low thankfully (probably because most infected are young. While over exaggerating the reality is not something I don’t agree with, the facts are available but the dramatic commentary hopefully convinces people to get the shot. And I suspect that’s the intention.
I agree insurance mandating vaccines is far from ideal and is a slippery slope (ie we won’t pay for inpatient psych treatment because you stopped taking your psych meds- a very common issue in the psych field… or not paying for your heart attack intervention because you didn’t take your cardiac meds). At the same time, other types of insurance (ie car insurance) denies claims for negligent behavior routinely (ie not reporting the accident or seeking medical attention in a timely manner, driving under the influence of without a valid license, etc) or you can be determined to be at-fault if you have bald tires or worn brakes.
I want to avoid getting political into a political debste, but we know objectively there are some populations that are less likely to get vaccinated:
- Young people (ages 18-39)
- Rural conservatives
- Black people
- Hispanic people
I think the government needs to specifically focus on these populations with high rates of hesitancy and focus on targeted marketing/education, community efforts, and possibly incentives to get these people on board. If the government offered say $50-100 to young or lower class people, I suspect people would become much more interested (maybe partner with big companies for gift certificates to offset some cost). Getting more, locally trusted community leaders to encourage vaccinations with professionals to answer questions and hold on-site clinics would probably help. I’d love to see the Biden administration swallow a little pride and make an effort to work (if possible) with Trump (the self proclaimed inventor of the COVID vaccine) to address the right/Republican/conservative population. If it works Biden can then tout overcoming hesitancy and bipartisanship as a success.
On the medical front, I think every single HCP (from doctor to nurse to pharmacist to dentist.. hell veterinarians, why not) needs to ask patients if they are vaccinated. If they’re not, they need to non-judgementally encourage it, educate, address concerns, etc and ensure they sign up for vaccination before they leave.
Working in a (psych) hospital we try to get every patient vaccinated when they come in the door. If they refuse, we try again during their stay and before they leave. In relatively rare cases (ie guardianship) we can mandate the vaccine with the guardians consent. Vaccines aren’t applicable to involuntarily pharmacotherapy in cases of involuntary commitment. Most of our patients are here voluntarily as it is. Lately about 40%-50% refuse consistently… but we’re dealing with a lot of mentally ill people, many of whom have paranoia, delusions, irrational beliefs, hyper-religiosity, etc. 40-50% agree or can be convinced with some education and praise. 10-20% take some time but eventually accept (often after their psych symptoms are better controlled).
I have these vaccine conversations daily with patients. I’ve even wrapped COVID vaccines into our patient medication education groups. It can be frustrating but I have far more patience on this subject with people suffering mental illnesses that significantly distort reality than I do the general public. The hesitant general public absolutely deserves to have their questions and concerns answered respectfully. But once conspiracies are brought up or reality is denied, I lose my internal patience quickly… it’s difficult to argue against things with no basis in reality to begin with that someone else believes.
I’m curious if there is anyone here who has access and is eligible to get the vaccine but has not done so.
I find it interesting how some people can't accept the reality of these vaccines being experimental to begin with. If you look fact sheets for recipients and caregivers on the CDC website it makes that very clear. Along with explanation of what an EUA cleared medical treatment.
"The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine has not undergone the same type of review as an FDA- approved or cleared product. FDA may issue an EUA when certain criteria are met, which includes that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives. In addition, the FDA decision is based on the totality of the scientific evidence available showing that the product may be effective to prevent COVID-19 during the COVID-19 pandemic and that the known and potential benefits of the product outweigh the known and potential risks of the product. All of these criteria must be met to allow for the product to be used during the COVID-19 pandemic." - Moderna fact sheet
With that being said, the current clinical trial phase is still ongoing. Several groups of people (Pregnant Women and those who were immunocompromised) were never part of the original clinical trials. Also, the data of those studies is not reliable as participants from the placebo group were offer the vaccine not allowing for the proper following of a placebo group. Moderna is in the progress of just now testing that. That is alarming considering several "experts" saying there are no safety indicators?! How is that possible when that was never observed in a clinical trial. Most modern vaccines take 5-10 years to bring to marker due to longitudinal studies among a large portion of the population.
Now lets talk about early intervention and treatment or the lack of acknowledgment of the numerous peer reviews studies and observational studies on several repurposed drugs and vitamin protocols. Take a look at Dr McCullough, Dr. Zelenko, Dr. Varon, Dr Brownstein among other pioneers.
At the end of the day, (in my opinion) everyone should be presented the data and allowed to make the best decision for themselves.
"The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine has not undergone the same type of review as an FDA- approved or cleared product. FDA may issue an EUA when certain criteria are met, which includes that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives. In addition, the FDA decision is based on the totality of the scientific evidence available showing that the product may be effective to prevent COVID-19 during the COVID-19 pandemic and that the known and potential benefits of the product outweigh the known and potential risks of the product. All of these criteria must be met to allow for the product to be used during the COVID-19 pandemic." - Moderna fact sheet
With that being said, the current clinical trial phase is still ongoing. Several groups of people (Pregnant Women and those who were immunocompromised) were never part of the original clinical trials. Also, the data of those studies is not reliable as participants from the placebo group were offer the vaccine not allowing for the proper following of a placebo group. Moderna is in the progress of just now testing that. That is alarming considering several "experts" saying there are no safety indicators?! How is that possible when that was never observed in a clinical trial. Most modern vaccines take 5-10 years to bring to marker due to longitudinal studies among a large portion of the population.
Now lets talk about early intervention and treatment or the lack of acknowledgment of the numerous peer reviews studies and observational studies on several repurposed drugs and vitamin protocols. Take a look at Dr McCullough, Dr. Zelenko, Dr. Varon, Dr Brownstein among other pioneers.
At the end of the day, (in my opinion) everyone should be presented the data and allowed to make the best decision for themselves.
Last edited:
The difference is that we aren’t masking nor social distancing now vs last summer. Which is why numbers could explode. My gym has 100 to 150 children in camp and daycare, often in close quarters. What happens if one infected child or adult is there?
It will be interesting to see if they change policies this weekend. Parents need the camps so that they can work so it would be difficult if they shut them down. Delta is a bug game changer. our vaccination rate is only 54% in my town. It was enough to get us to zero cases but it isn’t enough to stop Delta In an environ where everything is open.
That’s not how public health works. Your decision impacts other people. If you guarantee that your decision does not affect others, then your points would be valid.
Pierce vs Society of Sisters deals with educational law but it shows that the state can have an intrusive hand in our lives.
Concerning children…since Jan 2020 according to the CDC the number of children who have died with or of COVID. Why not look at the cases of pneumonia or Flu and how they affect children? Do we mask children and force vaccinate them due to the risk?
Attachments
Almost 4 billion doses of the vaccination have been given worldwide to date. There are very very very few drugs that ever get that kind of widespread use even over decades. And there is no better way to test a drug then give it out and see what happens.
Could there by long-term effects? Possibly, but the mechanism of delivery for both the mRNA and the traditional virus approach are well-understood (especially compared to most drugs that hit the market). You have to compare the risk to the rate of infection and death...
...As I heard one doctor say, "It's like getting shot and saying you don't want to go to the hospital because you might get in a car accident on the way there."
Are you serious? So let me get this straight, for the hundreds of thousands of reports of adverse events reported whose fault is it? Who is held liable for loss of work or loss of function and maybe your life?
Almost 4 billion doses of the vaccination have been given worldwide to date. There are very very very few drugs that ever get that kind of widespread use even over decades. And there is no better way to test a drug then give it out and see what happens.
www.nytimes.com
SWINE FLU PROGRAM IS HALTED IN 9 STATES AS 3 DIE AFTER SHOTS (Published 1976)
Swine flu vaccination programs in 9 states and in Pittsburgh and suburbs are suspended after deaths of 3 elderly persons who recd vaccine at Pittsburgh clinic; Fed and Pa health officials say there is no evidence that deaths resulted from vaccinations; all 3 patients were known to have had heart...
on top of all this, no one questions the track history of these Pharma companies? Not saying all medications or medical treatments are bad but there is reason why a majority of the US is hesitant to blindly sign up.
www.justice.gov
Justice Department Announces Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History
American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together “Pfizer”) have agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from...
Public Policy works within vast constraints. Decisions made may result in deaths or injury but the idea is the greater public good.
Have those adverse effects been studied and analyzed and verified? Have you personally verified any of them.
I was on a clinical trial. I’d be willing to take the Delta booster in a clinical trial. I can’t believe that there is so much fear out there.
Almost 4 billion doses of the vaccination have been given worldwide to date. There are very very very few drugs that ever get that kind of widespread use even over decades. And there is no better way to test a drug then give it out and see what happens.
SWINE FLU PROGRAM IS HALTED IN 9 STATES AS 3 DIE AFTER SHOTS (Published 1976)
Swine flu vaccination programs in 9 states and in Pittsburgh and suburbs are suspended after deaths of 3 elderly persons who recd vaccine at Pittsburgh clinic; Fed and Pa health officials say there is no evidence that deaths resulted from vaccinations; all 3 patients were known to have had heart...
Newsflash. People die. A lot of people die. Every single day. If some dies after eating a Big Mac, do we blame the Big Mac?
My father was wounded in WWII and lost a kidney. He ultimately died from kidney failure. He volunteered to serve his country and risk his life as did numerous other men and women at that time. I'm kind of amazed that a large number of people won't just take a vaccination to serve their country. Perhaps that's why they are called The Greatest Generation.
Last edited:
Just to jump in here, I was the one that brought up insurance mandates on vaccines and I absolutely agree it’s a violation of patient autonomy and a potentially a slippery slope.
That said, there are some differences. Using his example, smoking is ultimately conscious choice (not to delve into a debate about the nature of addiction, which I’m well aware of as it’s something I treat professionally- but there are many resources and treatments available for help quitting. The first attempts usually are not successful, but with persistence it can be done). Smoking either causes or negatively influences literally almost every medical condition there is and is a burden on the healthcare system.
Similarly, there are some insurers who will provide discounts to subscribers who exercise or who are overweight and lose weight. (I actually know someone whose insurance gave them a Fitbit to provide evidence they were exercising, so she put it on her dog’s collar and would play fetch, haha. Not sure how that works without the pulse data)
The difference between typical preventable diseases (or even treatable diseases i.e. hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, most bipolar cases, etc) and preventable
that are preventable with vaccines (particularly like COVID, especially in the context of an active pandemic) is that the latter can directly affect the health of others.
If you have diabetes, obesity, HTN, etc, your condition does not affect the health of others. One’s untreated diabetes or high cholesterol is not going to put our endocrine system or cardiac health at risk. On the other hand, in recent years we’ve had a number of localized pertussis (whooping cough) outbreaks in the US due to low DTaP/ Tdap vaccination rates in some communities (often high income areas with vaccination rates well below herd immunity, as low as 20%… rates lower than South Sudan). Despite the DTaP/ Tdap vaccines being 80-90% effective, when herd immunity is lost breakthrough cases become more prevalent. Plus some people have conditions that prevent them from being vaccinated and depend on herd immunity, thus putting them at even higher risk.
On the plus side pertussis can be treated with antibiotics. On the negative side pertussis effects are caused by a toxin that lingers for months and there is no way to get rid of it faster. Not having to use antibiotics if you don’t have to is ideal, especially considering rapidly increasing antibiotic resistance.
Similarly, not being vaccinated for COVID not only puts you at some level risk (relatively low for young people), but also others (some at very high risk), including those who are vaccinated. And perhaps most significantly,
more infection means a higher risk of mutations beneficial to the pathogen transmissibility, pharmaceutical resistance, and potentially resulting in a more deadly strain.
@Sir-Eat-a-Ton
I would push back calling the vaccines “experimental” is not accurate. Experimental means safety and efficacy have not been established- if you receive an experimental treatment there is not guarantee of either and there is a legal/ethical obligation to inform recipients of the treatment. Experimental also implies the subject is being closely monitored for data collection.
The vaccines have been through quite rigorous clinical trial phases, frankly in many ways more comprehensive than your average FDA approved pharmaceutical (each vaccine was tested experimentally on 10’s of thousands while most drugs are tested 500-2000 subjects). There is also a tremendous amount of ongoing “phase IV” studies that look at efficacy and side effects in the general population. The vaccines are FDA authorized, safety and efficacy have been established. The limitation of the studies used for the vaccines’ EUA’s really comes down to the duration of monitoring, which was cut back in the clinical trials due to necessity. That said, it’s not typical for vaccine side effects to appear more than 2-3 maybe 4 weeks after dosing, especially considering unlike most other pharmaceuticals it’s not taken on a daily basis or targeting neurotransmitter or hormone receptors. IIRC when the EUA was issued on Pfizer we already knew it had at least 7-8 months of efficacy. I think the biggest question the FDA has at this point is how long is immunity maintained.
Under normal circumstances it usually takes 4-10 years to find potential drug candidates and narrow it down to one. 6-7 years to preform the three phases of clinical trials. Even with years of clinical trials it can take decades to discover side effects. Plus another 1-2 years for FDA approval. Now with hundreds of millions of doses administered and a reduction in case numbers, hospitalizations, and death corresponding to vaccinated communities, there’s little question the vaccines are safe and effective. The difference between an EUA and FDA approval is basically time but as mentioned in terms of vaccines historically, time has little relevance to safety. Either you get a negative reaction immediately to a few weeks after, or you don’t.
I would say however generally speaking mandating a pharmaceutical authorized under an EUA from the perspective of the public is inherently problematic considering your average person knows nothing about drug development and approval. In the case of the COVID-19 vaccine I have little concerns given the risk of the virus, intense clinical trials, and extensive ongoing research, especially considering how many people have received it. The FDA should be approving them as early Jan 2022 under accelerated review (meaning it’s prioritized over other applications, not that corners are being cut).
There are numerous of examples of drugs approved by the FDA that either have major trial limitations, insufficient informations/research, and/or have questionable clinical benefit… (Fortunately the COVID vaccine IMO doesn’t really fall into this category). Yet in many cases no one questions using these drugs.
Just to put things in perspective, several years ago a new insomnia drug with a completely novel mechanism of action was approved called Belsomra. Rather than blocking CNS histamine or activating GABA receptors, it blocks “orexin” receptors (something no medical professional knew about until this drug came out), inhibiting wakefulness. Their clinical trial had 500 subjects (incredibly small for such a common condition), monitored for up to 3 months. By comparison the Pfizer vaccine trials had almost 44,000 participants.
I had a discussion with a pharma company a few years ago about their dosing protocol of a new product (long-lasting injection administered monthly of and long established oral drug). The new injection had one-size fits all dosing, while the oral drug dosing could 8-24mg (up to 3x min dose). I had to speak to their chief of medicine involved in the study to find someone who knew what they were talking about. To determine the dosing they tested 3-4 180-200lb males in their 20’s, with the dose determined off some computer algorithm that calculated opiate receptor populations. They also claimed the injection was totally comparable to the oral version, except the average drug levels in the blood were 2-5x+ higher. Considering this is an opiate, risk of overdose is a concern, not to mention dose dependent side effects. Interestingly, in the past year they have added additional dosing regimens. They also removed the comparison of blood concentrations compared to the oral formulation from their drug information monograph.
And now we have this new Alzheimer’s drug, Aduhelm, that was recently FDA approved despite the advisory committee (independent of the FDA, they form an independent opinion- often more lenient than the FDA) opposing- leading to multiple resignations from the committee. It was approved despite insufficient evidence it actually slows cognitive decline, instead using a surrogate endpoint of reduction of amyloid plaque in the brain- which isn’t proven to improve cognition or slow mental deterioration. Basically the idea is throw it on the market and see if it works… which is quite experimental… at the cost of $60,000/year. As it is the two existing Alzheimer’s drugs slow disease profession by only a month or two… basically delaying the inevitable and dragging out the likely suffering. Not much clinical utility IMO.
I don't know.. why don't you ask that same question for those anti-abortionists attacking Planned Parenthood and those who want an abortion..
You can't have it both ways.
According to SCOTUS, we can. We've had a 116 year precedent on that.
BL.
Three people died in two weeks is your example?SWINE FLU PROGRAM IS HALTED IN 9 STATES AS 3 DIE AFTER SHOTS (Published 1976)
Swine flu vaccination programs in 9 states and in Pittsburgh and suburbs are suspended after deaths of 3 elderly persons who recd vaccine at Pittsburgh clinic; Fed and Pa health officials say there is no evidence that deaths resulted from vaccinations; all 3 patients were known to have had heart...
We -- or perhaps more accurately, the government we elect -- make policy decisions that cost and save many lives every day. As a simple but significant example, we increased the speed limits on highways from 55 to 65, and to 75 in some places. Research shows a 17% rise in deaths following a 4% rise in speeds on US interstates. And yet we do it. And you'd have a heck of a time politicly lowering it to 55.
As a reminder, very roughly, about 600,000 Americans died in one year from COVID. This is what the theoretical risks from a vaccination have to be compared to.
Last edited:
Bingo. Not to mention millions of deaths globally… the true extent we will probably never know due to reporting limitations in less developed countries and varying interpretations of a COVID caused death vs. COVID associated. Regardless, it’s a significant number of people.
Meanwhile, relatively speaking there have only been a handful of adverse events directly associated and potentially aassociated with the vaccines. It’s also important to note that conditions like Bells Palsy and myocarditis are also associated with the active infection. And any observed associations take time to prove a likely or definite causation.
I also think it’s important keep in mind that vaccines essentially replicate a natural process that’s occurring constantly in your body. Pathogens continuously enter your body, your body develops antibodies (or uses existing antibodies), and creates an immune response. There is a constant war going on on a microscopic level. Vaccines don’t hang out in your body very long. Typically you get a shot or two and you’re good years if not forever. They don’t target systems that control bodily functions like drugs that cause significant, persistent side effects. They don’t affect the metabolism of other drugs. Their doses don’t have toxicity issues, like causing kidney or liver damage.
Even the most dangerous conventional drugs typically are not dangerous after one or two exposures- exception being doses well above what is reasonable. It’s the continuous, repeated exposure that things can become problematic
Comparing the common issues of vaccines with that of traditional pharmaceuticals is like comparing apples and oranges. And I wish this knowledge was more available to people.
Of all the vaccines I’m aware of, at least the ones common today, unless you have some serious exceedingly rare adverse event (ie autoimmune reaction or some grievous mistake like a contaminated vial causing major infection) common long term side effects are unheard of.
For very severe cases of COVID, in addition to the inherent risks of long term bodily damage and death, the risks of being put on antibiotics, corticosteroids, and/or a ventilator are far greater than those of vaccines. Bring on a ventilator automatically necessitates antibiotics and anesthesia (risky, especially in old folks and people on certain meds). Monoclonal antibodies also carry risks too.
First part: true, but I think the number of such people will be relatively small. Second part: I don't think this will have much of an effect. The process for full approval usually takes more than a year. I don't think that application was made until quite recently, and they are saying approval might come in September. The people who are concerned about emergency use authorization will fuss over the speed of full approval as well.