Friends Whom Are Not Getting The Vaccine

brianlux

lastexitlondon said:

My dr seems to think  a bad reaction  to the vaccine  means you would have suffered  more from  covid .  I dont know the science  of this?

If that's true (and it may well be), then I'm guessing if I had gotten COVID I would probably be dead as a door nail.

DarthMaeglin

Meltdown99 said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Meltdown99 said:

DarthMaeglin said:

oftenreading said:

tempo_n_groove said:

oftenreading said:

DarthMaeglin said:

oftenreading said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I'll put myself forward as someone who's quasi-hesitant. My concerns however are unique to my country as far as I know (Canada).

Talking with my sister the other night she clearly didn't like that I'm considering waiting for my first shot because my governments (both federal and provincial) are extending the second shot to 16 weeks over the manufacturer's protests.  I'm not against being vaccinated but am contemplating waiting until our supply shortens the gap (I'd personally prefer the more traditional vaccine from AstraZeneca). I'm equally uncomfortable with mixing vaccines,  something my provincial government is looking at. 

The deciding factor may be that I live with my parents who are both over 70 (both have had their first Pfizer shot).

The choice is obviously yours but you are increasing your risk by waiting just so that you can have your two doses closer together. The protection from a first dose is nothing to sneeze at and appears to be durable for at least the time interval, unless one is in some way immunocompromised. If you get a first dose and then wait up to 16 weeks for the second dose you have protection of around 70% in that interval, compared to no immunity.

The manufacturers are obliged to reinforce the interval for which they received their approval, because saying anything else contradicts their own submission; however, they know the evidence as well as anyone. There is some evidence now to suggest improved protection with the longer gap once the two shots have been given, rather than lessened protection. 

Unfortunately my hesitation on the gap falls into the category of "not a lab rat," lol. This is the first I've heard of the gap leading to good protection so I need to look into that,  thanks for the input (everything I've read until now suggested lower protection overall,  with no real studies either way...yet).

And just to be clear,  I truly hope this policy doesn't backfire on us. My biggest fear is actually that Canada will deliver the vaccine-resistant variant to the world, again hoping (and praying) I'm wrong.

I am really not at all convinced that the dosing strategy of spreading out the intervals will lead to any worsening in the pandemic, and in particular won't lead to any worsening variants. I think people tend to confuse vaccination with an active treatment like, say, antibiotics. Antibiotics work to treat a present infection, and if the infection isn't completely cleared, like if the person doesn't complete their course of antibiotics, then this selects for resistant strains and further problems.

However, vaccination is not at all like that. Vaccination works to prevent infection, and where it can't do that, reduce the severity of the infection. In the absence of vaccination you are essentially at 100% risk of getting infected and transmitting the virus to others if exposed (I'm simplifying here), and in this manner provide a reservoir of infection, and it's this reservoir of infected or potentially infected people that leads to development of variants.

A first dose of vaccine provides a good but not perfect level of protection (the data varies, somewhere between around 70% to the high 80s%). That means that the vaccinated people are significantly less likely to act as a reservoir of infection, and thus to contribute to development of variants. There is no partial treatment effect that promotes variants; the two situations are simply not comparable. Getting even one dose provides you with good protection AND reduces the risk that you will get infected, develop a mutated version of the virus, and transmit it to others. 

Your body is building an immunity.  Makes sense.

Yes. I'm not sure I gave the simplest explanation up there, though I tried

Maybe this is a more coherent answer - with an antibiotic, it's a pharmaceutical agent that is largely doing the job of getting rid of the infection, but with vaccination, it's your own immune system. You either go into an infection with no prior exposure or you go into it with some prior exposure from the vaccine, but in either case it's just your own immune system working the best it can. The better job it is able to do, the better your chance at staying well, destroying the virus, and not passing on mutated versions. 

Both descriptions made good sense to me, thanks again.  As it is it sounds like Toronto is booked until June (unless I manage catch a pop-up clinic for a hotspot). The booking system in Toronto and Ontario is not easily navigable.

As I said above living with my older parents will likely be the deciding factor for me.

I booked my vaccine app in less than 5 minutes through our local health.  I booked my fathers vaccine app. In just a few minutes via telephone.  So not all of Ontario is having problems.

Toronto seems to be a strange patchwork system with multiple booking options: the provincial system, the city’s system, local hospital networks and (I believe) select pharmacies, as well as the popup clinics.

Based on my sister’s experience in Ottawa my preferred option is probably the pharmacy where I can likely get the AstraZeneca shot. I’m digging into my options as a birthday present to mom, lol.

Separately, I would like to thank everyone for your insights and (moreso) engaging reasonably and without any bullying/pushiness. Doesn’t always happen and I do try to give thanks when I feel it’s due.

I understand what you are saying.  The rollout has gone poorly I’m many places.  It is what it is at this point.  A lot of folks in Ontario is losing their shit…on both sides…lol

I’m now on the waitlist for my local Rexall, it really was quite simple. See how it goes as the neighbourhood has a few high-rises so I may be waiting a little bit, but since it won’t change my mobility with the stay-at-home order in effect I’m not particularly worried, lol.

DarthMaeglin

Since the province has stopped first shots of AZ I’m now booked for Monday afternoon at my local hospital, I wonder which of the vaccines I’m leery of that I’ll get, lol.

Meltdown99

DarthMaeglin said:

Meltdown99 said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Meltdown99 said:

DarthMaeglin said:

oftenreading said:

tempo_n_groove said:

oftenreading said:

DarthMaeglin said:

oftenreading said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I'll put myself forward as someone who's quasi-hesitant. My concerns however are unique to my country as far as I know (Canada).

Talking with my sister the other night she clearly didn't like that I'm considering waiting for my first shot because my governments (both federal and provincial) are extending the second shot to 16 weeks over the manufacturer's protests.  I'm not against being vaccinated but am contemplating waiting until our supply shortens the gap (I'd personally prefer the more traditional vaccine from AstraZeneca). I'm equally uncomfortable with mixing vaccines,  something my provincial government is looking at. 

The deciding factor may be that I live with my parents who are both over 70 (both have had their first Pfizer shot).

The choice is obviously yours but you are increasing your risk by waiting just so that you can have your two doses closer together. The protection from a first dose is nothing to sneeze at and appears to be durable for at least the time interval, unless one is in some way immunocompromised. If you get a first dose and then wait up to 16 weeks for the second dose you have protection of around 70% in that interval, compared to no immunity.

The manufacturers are obliged to reinforce the interval for which they received their approval, because saying anything else contradicts their own submission; however, they know the evidence as well as anyone. There is some evidence now to suggest improved protection with the longer gap once the two shots have been given, rather than lessened protection. 

Unfortunately my hesitation on the gap falls into the category of "not a lab rat," lol. This is the first I've heard of the gap leading to good protection so I need to look into that,  thanks for the input (everything I've read until now suggested lower protection overall,  with no real studies either way...yet).

And just to be clear,  I truly hope this policy doesn't backfire on us. My biggest fear is actually that Canada will deliver the vaccine-resistant variant to the world, again hoping (and praying) I'm wrong.

I am really not at all convinced that the dosing strategy of spreading out the intervals will lead to any worsening in the pandemic, and in particular won't lead to any worsening variants. I think people tend to confuse vaccination with an active treatment like, say, antibiotics. Antibiotics work to treat a present infection, and if the infection isn't completely cleared, like if the person doesn't complete their course of antibiotics, then this selects for resistant strains and further problems.

However, vaccination is not at all like that. Vaccination works to prevent infection, and where it can't do that, reduce the severity of the infection. In the absence of vaccination you are essentially at 100% risk of getting infected and transmitting the virus to others if exposed (I'm simplifying here), and in this manner provide a reservoir of infection, and it's this reservoir of infected or potentially infected people that leads to development of variants.

A first dose of vaccine provides a good but not perfect level of protection (the data varies, somewhere between around 70% to the high 80s%). That means that the vaccinated people are significantly less likely to act as a reservoir of infection, and thus to contribute to development of variants. There is no partial treatment effect that promotes variants; the two situations are simply not comparable. Getting even one dose provides you with good protection AND reduces the risk that you will get infected, develop a mutated version of the virus, and transmit it to others. 

Your body is building an immunity.  Makes sense.

Yes. I'm not sure I gave the simplest explanation up there, though I tried

Maybe this is a more coherent answer - with an antibiotic, it's a pharmaceutical agent that is largely doing the job of getting rid of the infection, but with vaccination, it's your own immune system. You either go into an infection with no prior exposure or you go into it with some prior exposure from the vaccine, but in either case it's just your own immune system working the best it can. The better job it is able to do, the better your chance at staying well, destroying the virus, and not passing on mutated versions. 

Both descriptions made good sense to me, thanks again.  As it is it sounds like Toronto is booked until June (unless I manage catch a pop-up clinic for a hotspot). The booking system in Toronto and Ontario is not easily navigable.

As I said above living with my older parents will likely be the deciding factor for me.

I booked my vaccine app in less than 5 minutes through our local health.  I booked my fathers vaccine app. In just a few minutes via telephone.  So not all of Ontario is having problems.

Toronto seems to be a strange patchwork system with multiple booking options: the provincial system, the city’s system, local hospital networks and (I believe) select pharmacies, as well as the popup clinics.

Based on my sister’s experience in Ottawa my preferred option is probably the pharmacy where I can likely get the AstraZeneca shot. I’m digging into my options as a birthday present to mom, lol.

Separately, I would like to thank everyone for your insights and (moreso) engaging reasonably and without any bullying/pushiness. Doesn’t always happen and I do try to give thanks when I feel it’s due.

I understand what you are saying.  The rollout has gone poorly I’m many places.  It is what it is at this point.  A lot of folks in Ontario is losing their shit…on both sides…lol

I’m now on the waitlist for my local Rexall, it really was quite simple. See how it goes as the neighbourhood has a few high-rises so I may be waiting a little bit, but since it won’t change my mobility with the stay-at-home order in effect I’m not particularly worried, lol.

I got the Pfizer.  Other than a sore arm I had no side effects.  Personally, I wish the land border was open…I’d head to Michigan for my 2nd dose…good luck.  Your parents will be thankful.

oftenreading

DarthMaeglin said:

Since the province has stopped first shots of AZ I’m now booked for Monday afternoon at my local hospital, I wonder which of the vaccines I’m leery of that I’ll get, lol.

Good luck! I think you said you're getting vaccinated to protect your parents - good for you.

Johnny Abruzzo

I mean, Pfizer and Moderna just happened to separate their doses by 3 & 4 weeks in their trials - that doesn't mean it's a magic number. I think Canada's strategy is probably optimal given their situation. Of course I'm no doctor or scientist so...

oftenreading

Johnny Abruzzo said:

I mean, Pfizer and Moderna just happened to separate their doses by 3 & 4 weeks in their trials - that doesn't mean it's a magic number. I think Canada's strategy is probably optimal given their situation. Of course I'm no doctor or scientist so...

Yes, their dosing strategy was chosen to provide rapid results rather than optimal immunological response. 

DarthMaeglin

Thanks everyone, I don’t mean to dominate this thread (sorry OP!), I just figured since I put my case out there I should make sure that subplot gets wrapped up, lol.

Coincidentally my first shot is on my sister’s birthday (the hospital was booked through Sunday), lol.

The North

oftenreading said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I'll put myself forward as someone who's quasi-hesitant. My concerns however are unique to my country as far as I know (Canada).

Talking with my sister the other night she clearly didn't like that I'm considering waiting for my first shot because my governments (both federal and provincial) are extending the second shot to 16 weeks over the manufacturer's protests.  I'm not against being vaccinated but am contemplating waiting until our supply shortens the gap (I'd personally prefer the more traditional vaccine from AstraZeneca). I'm equally uncomfortable with mixing vaccines,  something my provincial government is looking at. 

The deciding factor may be that I live with my parents who are both over 70 (both have had their first Pfizer shot).

The choice is obviously yours but you are increasing your risk by waiting just so that you can have your two doses closer together. The protection from a first dose is nothing to sneeze at and appears to be durable for at least the time interval, unless one is in some way immunocompromised. If you get a first dose and then wait up to 16 weeks for the second dose you have protection of around 70% in that interval, compared to no immunity.

The manufacturers are obliged to reinforce the interval for which they received their approval, because saying anything else contradicts their own submission; however, they know the evidence as well as anyone. There is some evidence now to suggest improved protection with the longer gap once the two shots have been given, rather than lessened protection. 

Great point. But speaking of how they received their approval (or more accurately authorization) ..... Both Moderna's and Pfizer's submissions for emergency use authorization (available for the public to read) did not include anything about preventing infection or preventing transmission. Their trials simply looked at reducing the severity of illness of infected individuals (which they both seem to be great at doing) and short-term safety. So, any talk of vaccination preventing transmission, at this point, is premature and speculative. I do hope, however, that future studies will confirm that the vaccines do prevent transmission...... we just don't know at this time.

What we do know is that they prevent severe illness and death for those at risk.

oftenreading

The North said:

oftenreading said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I'll put myself forward as someone who's quasi-hesitant. My concerns however are unique to my country as far as I know (Canada).

Talking with my sister the other night she clearly didn't like that I'm considering waiting for my first shot because my governments (both federal and provincial) are extending the second shot to 16 weeks over the manufacturer's protests.  I'm not against being vaccinated but am contemplating waiting until our supply shortens the gap (I'd personally prefer the more traditional vaccine from AstraZeneca). I'm equally uncomfortable with mixing vaccines,  something my provincial government is looking at. 

The deciding factor may be that I live with my parents who are both over 70 (both have had their first Pfizer shot).

The choice is obviously yours but you are increasing your risk by waiting just so that you can have your two doses closer together. The protection from a first dose is nothing to sneeze at and appears to be durable for at least the time interval, unless one is in some way immunocompromised. If you get a first dose and then wait up to 16 weeks for the second dose you have protection of around 70% in that interval, compared to no immunity.

The manufacturers are obliged to reinforce the interval for which they received their approval, because saying anything else contradicts their own submission; however, they know the evidence as well as anyone. There is some evidence now to suggest improved protection with the longer gap once the two shots have been given, rather than lessened protection. 

Great point. But speaking of how they received their approval (or more accurately authorization) ..... Both Moderna's and Pfizer's submissions for emergency use authorization (available for the public to read) did not include anything about preventing infection or preventing transmission. Their trials simply looked at reducing the severity of illness of infected individuals (which they both seem to be great at doing) and short-term safety. So, any talk of vaccination preventing transmission, at this point, is premature and speculative. I do hope, however, that future studies will confirm that the vaccines do prevent transmission...... we just don't know at this time.

What we do know is that they prevent severe illness and death for those at risk.

You are not correct - we do have good data on reduction of transmission now. At the time of submission of the dossiers for approval that data did not exist but it does now. 

The North

oftenreading said:

The North said:

oftenreading said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I'll put myself forward as someone who's quasi-hesitant. My concerns however are unique to my country as far as I know (Canada).

Talking with my sister the other night she clearly didn't like that I'm considering waiting for my first shot because my governments (both federal and provincial) are extending the second shot to 16 weeks over the manufacturer's protests.  I'm not against being vaccinated but am contemplating waiting until our supply shortens the gap (I'd personally prefer the more traditional vaccine from AstraZeneca). I'm equally uncomfortable with mixing vaccines,  something my provincial government is looking at. 

The deciding factor may be that I live with my parents who are both over 70 (both have had their first Pfizer shot).

The choice is obviously yours but you are increasing your risk by waiting just so that you can have your two doses closer together. The protection from a first dose is nothing to sneeze at and appears to be durable for at least the time interval, unless one is in some way immunocompromised. If you get a first dose and then wait up to 16 weeks for the second dose you have protection of around 70% in that interval, compared to no immunity.

The manufacturers are obliged to reinforce the interval for which they received their approval, because saying anything else contradicts their own submission; however, they know the evidence as well as anyone. There is some evidence now to suggest improved protection with the longer gap once the two shots have been given, rather than lessened protection. 

Great point. But speaking of how they received their approval (or more accurately authorization) ..... Both Moderna's and Pfizer's submissions for emergency use authorization (available for the public to read) did not include anything about preventing infection or preventing transmission. Their trials simply looked at reducing the severity of illness of infected individuals (which they both seem to be great at doing) and short-term safety. So, any talk of vaccination preventing transmission, at this point, is premature and speculative. I do hope, however, that future studies will confirm that the vaccines do prevent transmission...... we just don't know at this time.

What we do know is that they prevent severe illness and death for those at risk.

You are not correct - we do have good data on reduction of transmission now. At the time of submission of the dossiers for approval that data did not exist but it does now. 

I am happy to be corrected, but I'm finding it very difficult to find that data..... Legitimate data like peer reviewed studies. If anyone has any to share, please do so as I think we all need to be accurately informed.

The North

The North said:

oftenreading said:

The North said:

oftenreading said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I'll put myself forward as someone who's quasi-hesitant. My concerns however are unique to my country as far as I know (Canada).

Talking with my sister the other night she clearly didn't like that I'm considering waiting for my first shot because my governments (both federal and provincial) are extending the second shot to 16 weeks over the manufacturer's protests.  I'm not against being vaccinated but am contemplating waiting until our supply shortens the gap (I'd personally prefer the more traditional vaccine from AstraZeneca). I'm equally uncomfortable with mixing vaccines,  something my provincial government is looking at. 

The deciding factor may be that I live with my parents who are both over 70 (both have had their first Pfizer shot).

The choice is obviously yours but you are increasing your risk by waiting just so that you can have your two doses closer together. The protection from a first dose is nothing to sneeze at and appears to be durable for at least the time interval, unless one is in some way immunocompromised. If you get a first dose and then wait up to 16 weeks for the second dose you have protection of around 70% in that interval, compared to no immunity.

The manufacturers are obliged to reinforce the interval for which they received their approval, because saying anything else contradicts their own submission; however, they know the evidence as well as anyone. There is some evidence now to suggest improved protection with the longer gap once the two shots have been given, rather than lessened protection. 

Great point. But speaking of how they received their approval (or more accurately authorization) ..... Both Moderna's and Pfizer's submissions for emergency use authorization (available for the public to read) did not include anything about preventing infection or preventing transmission. Their trials simply looked at reducing the severity of illness of infected individuals (which they both seem to be great at doing) and short-term safety. So, any talk of vaccination preventing transmission, at this point, is premature and speculative. I do hope, however, that future studies will confirm that the vaccines do prevent transmission...... we just don't know at this time.

What we do know is that they prevent severe illness and death for those at risk.

You are not correct - we do have good data on reduction of transmission now. At the time of submission of the dossiers for approval that data did not exist but it does now. 

I am happy to be corrected, but I'm finding it very difficult to find that data..... Legitimate data like peer reviewed studies. If anyone has any to share, please do so as I think we all need to be accurately informed.

Anybody? Oh, right....