A good laugh is always welcome when discussing “vaccines”


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

State and County menus fixed
 

I got all my personal info entered now. But when pushing the next button a red error message flashes at the top. something about VAMS. I thought VINI was replacing VAMS. Stilling pushing Next .....

Next finally suceeded. Got my email back from the State to Activate my account. Did so. Then trying to schedule. I can see sites and next available date. But when I click See Availability, it says:
Please select an available appointment slot below.

Hmmm, but only empty white space below. Still repeating.....

Tada - Sat 3/27
 

Got it scheduled 2 hrs and 57 min after I started trying the website.

Well I am happy to report that after much gyration an appointment has been made for our first vaccination!

Or... it could be our only one because it seems that the brand of the shot is not disclosed.

I'm just happy to get this rolling before the murder hornets return.

https://wmur.com/article/new-hampshi...-2021/35903414


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Easy-Peasy...
 

....maybe it was just timing, but we signed up no problemo today...plenty of availability both in Bedford area and Meredith area. We get jabbed on March 31!

Two and done!
 

WIfe and I got our 2nd this past Sat. (Pfizer) Very good feeling! I had a sore arm and a little fatigue, my wife was kinda wiped out and had a headache which lasted about 24 hours.

Interesting talk this morning about vaccines. Visited a local business and was asked if I was vaccinated? The reason they asked this question was due to the fact many customers are asking if their staff has been vaccinated and they are unsure how to or if they should answer. Can you refuse service to someone not vaccinated? Will you not accept service from a individual not vaccinated? Do you have the right to ask someone?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

This is America--so as a person or a customer, you may ask another person pretty much anything. I don't think a business may ask its employees if they are vaccinated, that would be a HIPAA violation. But like many employer/employee issues, it's tough to stonewall your boss. Personally, as a customer, I'd be psyched to see a sign that said "All of our staff is vaccinated".

It's still unclear to what degree vaccines prevent vaccinated people from transmitting covid to others. But if you're vaccinated yourself, you should be able to dine at any reasonably compliant place without concern.

Agree. I don’t understand ones hesitation or need to know if you yourself has been vaccinated. The risk is on the individual who hasn’t been vaccinated. We need to allow these businesses to open and be successfully once again.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I have been of the opinion since shortly after this thing began that there has been a severe over reaction. That said my wife signed us up for the vaccine and we went to Loudon racetrack today to get our shots. No matter how you feel about how various levels of government have handled the lockdowns I must say they are doing a fantastic job at Loudon. Very well organized and professional, easy access, quick in and out, everyone was super nice. Quite a large operation they got going there as I understand they will do over 10,000 people this weekend. Great job!

SWMBO and I went to our 9am poke at the Belknap Mall in Belmont on Thursday.

We were in and out in 30 minutes including a 15 minute post shot wait time.

I felt nothing when stuck.

That night my arm was a little sore.

By Friday morning that was gone and so far I have had no ill effects.

That is terrific, but who is SWMBO? I am dense tonight.

She Who Must Be Obeyed. Damn, does she give lessons?

Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Please sign me up!

I also got vaccinated yesterday at Loudon. I was very impressed with the entire operation.

QUESTIONS

(1) I heard that with the Pfizer vaccine you're 80% protected within two weeks after the first shot and 95% after the second one. Johnson and Johnson is 75% protection with only one shot needed. If J&J is considered to provide enough protection, then why is a second shot of Pfizer needed?

(2) Officials were pushing J&J, saying that 75% protection is fine and you should get J&J if it's offered to you. BUT: One of the arguments for wearing a mask after you're vaccinated is that the vaccine isn't 100% protective. Doesn't that mean that Pfizer and Moderna (95% protection after second dose) IS actually more effective than J&J?

I don't know the exact answers, but

1. There is the consideration of effectiveness AND duration AND current situation. As I know it, the second shot is a booster for longevity that also increases immunity. Pair that with the current level of vaccination, and that the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines were tested with earlier variants, and it's better/necessary to have the second jab (if most/everyone's vaccinated and the vaccine works for most variants, 75% is fine...)

2. Given #1, it makes sense to offer/take the one-jab J&J because it can vaccinate twice as many people. So, a town with 40k people with 80% vaccinated at 75% effectiveness is safer than 40% of a town with 95%. Add in that J&J and Pfizer/Moderna may be closer to each other in effectiveness when including new variants, and J&J is a game-changer. I mean, it's half the shipping, storage, production, manpower, etc. costs, doesn't require crazy storage, and already has other manufacturers making it. I would be surprised if Pfizer/Moderna doesn't figure out a one-jab or that J&J becomes the only one.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

This is a complex question with answers based on your viewpoint. What is good for the whole population vs. the individual. The cost of the vaccine's failure. WHO is giving the advice.

I will give my opinion, for what it is worth.

Consider the risk of failure of the vaccine. COVID can be fatal across ALL age brackets. COVID can also be permanently debilitating in many ways. There was a news article about a person who required a double lung and kidney transplant after COVID. Some might consider the loss of taste and smell as trivial but when it becomes permanent, that is a different matter. There are various problems across the spectrum of the population from minor to catastrophic.

Given the above, OF COURSE 95% protection is better than 75%. Consider a rounded US population of 300 million. 5% failure of a vaccine exposes 15 million people. 25% failure exposes 60 million, an ADDITIONAL 45 MILLION. I would consider that significant and important. NO, it does NOT mean that 45 million WILL get sick or will be at risk for serious illness but more at risk means more will get sick and some of those significantly ill.

In addition, many vaccines fade in effectiveness over time. 95% may fade to 80%. 75% to 60%. It is likely that starting higher means it will last longer as well, although I don't think they have long term test results yet.

As an individual, I want the best protection I can get. Again, 95% is better than 75%. If I could get either one, I would choose 95%. The problem is, there are not enough 95% effective vaccines to pass out to everyone right now. So, an individual may not have a choice.

"Officials were pushing J&J." OF COURSE they are. First, it is being defined as "success" if everyone is vaccinated, even with a less effective vaccine. An alternative approach would be to offer J & J to younger people who might not qualify for a 95% vaccine for a few more months; just to get them vaccinated. Since the younger population is also the one that tends to be more co-mingled with others, this might be a good individual choice. HOWEVER, the government is controlling the vaccine and THEY are all about EQUITY. So, a less effective vaccine is pushed on EVERYONE, even if it isn't a medically sound approach. You don't get a choice unless you decline the vaccine all together. Now the problem of the "less effectiveness" is equitably distributed among all who are waiting for vaccinations, even those who are more likely to get sick and have more severe symptoms.

I can say that I was VERY pleased to find my wife and I were getting Moderna. I would have probably accepted J & J because I am older and have medical problems and some protection is better than none. But, I would NOT have been happy and I WOULDN'T HAVE HAD A CHOICE.

As I said, my perspective. I'm sure that 40 year olds forced to accept J & J would probably not be too happy about it. Now we are all subject to the luck of the distribution even though I would have been at much higher risk for getting COVID and having significant illness from it.

Thanks for this helpful information! Reading between the lines, I think you're saying in #2 that J&J is beneficial for society, but that doesn't necessarily make it the best choice for individuals, if they have a choice---confirmed by jeffk. Currently in NH we do have a choice, which changes the picture.

Jeff, I agree with your take on this and that's exactly what I was asking about. I felt that both federal and state authorities were urging us to accept J&J without giving us the full facts. I understand the reasoning behind that, but people will be more receptive to government recommendations if they have honest facts about those. I did have a choice, and chose a site where I knew I would be getting Pfizer, because I didn't trust what we were being told about J&J; the information seemed incomplete. If I didn't have a choice, I would have accepted J&J.

(I just read two papers about the relationship between how the Chinese government communicated COVID-19 information to the public and the likelihood that people would comply with recommendations. How the information is presented determines whether people trust the source. Interestingly, people in China do trust government health information, which led to a high level of compliance and a quick end to the first wave last winter.)

Don't forget the very real potential that J&J might be as effective overall when considering new variants.

In terms of choice, most people I know simply signed up when possible and, when doing so, didn't really have one. For example, when I was finding CVS pharmacies near me in MA, the only ones with openings were offering Pfizer. For J&J, I would've had to drive to the other side of 93, so I did Pfizer. If "my" place was offering J&J, I'd have gotten that.

Remember that the differences are small overall as both are close to 100% at preventing major symptoms and hospitalization.

Godspeed, friend!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I think there are a significant number of people for whom being able to take the time to get two shots is prohibitive. In those cases, the one shot J&J would be preferable to no shots.

just to say
 

At 76 years old. and with underlying health conditions, after getting the OK from my blood Doctor I got both Moderna shots in the same arm with no negative side effects, last month here at the Dallas VA. Not even a sore arm.

I do like this very informative thread!

I would say those people make ill considered choices. Taking an extra couple hours to get a second shot of a more effective vaccine against a potentially lethal or crippling disease seems like the smarter decision.

Of course, it's THEIR choice. It can also be their choice to smoke, drink to excess and drive, have unprotected sex with strangers, ...

There's a sizeable number of people in America that simply don't have the time, transportation, or physical ability to get even one shot. Look at the situation in MA, where they had to offer up a "companion" shot for anyone who brought a 75+ person to an injection site. In addition, they just began an in-home delivery service to accommodate 25k people who would be otherwise unable to get vaccinated.

And it's not just older or low-income people who might struggle getting in two shots. I have former students—in their teens and twenties—who will find it hard to find the time to find an appointment and get to an injection site because they go to school during the day and work or play sports every other free hour.

One of the major failures in MA is that they focused on mass vaccination areas rather than going local like NH. I would've had to drive to Gillette if CVS wasn't given doses directly from the federal government. You know who wouldn't have been able to find the time for two 4-hour drives? This guy.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I would say that up in NH where the rollout has been relatively smooth, lots of appointments availabile (now), relatively little time waiting on lines, etc., that might be true. But in other parts of the country the time and effort people are taking just to make appointments is prohibitive to some people. I know people who are actually dedicating volunteer hours to signing up other people for their vaccinations because the system is so difficult to navigate and takes so much time. And then to even get shots people are travelling hours and hours, waiting for hours in line, etc. For people in those areas, I would say getting one is better than getting frustrated by the system and getting none.

That said, I'm getting mine today and truly hope I get Moderna or Pfizer. I feel fortunate that my lifestyle allows me the flexibility to plan to get both shots.

Why can't they say which vaccine they are giving?

It’s all statistics.

You are implying J&J is inferior by looking at 1 parameter among dozens.

What if J&J was 80%, but Moderna was 70% on first shot but you were exposed before you got the 2nd shot? Which is better. Time matters a lot here.

What are the chances that a J&J is mishandled vs a Moderna (either shot)?

J&J was tested against newer strains compared to earlier vaccines.

J&J wasn’t 100% effective of preventing symptoms, but was 100% effective preventing hospitalization or death and that includes newer strains.

J&J is so good it didn’t need a booster.

J&J has less side effects. And side effects are worse after the 2nd shot. And for some those side affects are pretty harsh.

We don’t know how long the effectiveness is of any vaccine.

We don’t know how good any are against transmission.

We don’t know what the possible long term side effects are of any.

If you could fully vaccinate everyone in half the time (half the shots) and more likely reach everyone because J&J does not need such extreme handling which is society better off with?

If more people get vaccinated sooner over a wider area the odds are better you won’t get exposed to someone not vaccinated. In fact that’s what the UK exactly did. They only gave ONE shot of the early two shot vaccine so they could get more people vaccinated sooner. They were in much worse shape than USA. Now they are in much better shape and much better trends (much lower numbers and headed sharply down).

J&J is the winner here. But the other two are also winners because time is so critical and they were available months sooner.

This may be true for some, but not for all. It took me 5 attempts to get my first shot due to system errors and wrong information from 2-1-1. I'm now registered on VINI but it has no record of my first shot and will not show any options for the second. I've spent hours on the phone with 2-1-1 etc. trying to resolve problems.

Seriously? If someone does not have enough time in their life to get a second shot, that may prevent them from contracting a fatal virus, I think they need to re-examine their priorities!

I would submit that no one is that busy!

Well said. I bet those folks have no problem finding time to go to Walmart or the liquor store or the hair dresser or barber shop etc...

You guys are so out-of-touch and judgmental.

There, but for the grace of God...

https://www.pewtrusts.org/research-a...vid-19-vaccine

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Just like you we have opinions. IMO so are you. Happy Easter.

Define irony: wishing someone a Happy Easter after stereotyping and persecuting the unfortunate.

Happy Easter to you, too.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Right back at ya, Happy Easter.

It was not your opinion that the vaccine should be everybody's top scheduling priority that was ironic. That was fair game. As a person who spent 4 hours on the phone wrangling an appointment, I agree.

The ironic part was stereotyping less fortunate people as prioritizing Walmart, booze, and hair as more important than the vaccine, while simultaneously alluding to the teachings of Jesus.

Can't I get a shot at Walmart now? Certainly at Walgreen's...It's getting easier and easier.

No stereotyping on my part, that is your read into my post and not my intention. Happy Easter to you.