# Would you get AstraZeneca vaccine?



## gibor365

There is a lot of controversy regarding AZ vaccine.... Curious what is your opnion.... "to do or not to do"?!


----------



## Dilbert

All vaccines have associated risks. I’ll take my chances.


----------



## gibor365

Also, if anyone already got AZ vaccine.....did you have some side effects? My brother's wife had AZ in UK several months ago and is telling that she had strong headache


----------



## Beaver101

My younger relatives who got the "Pfizer" vaccine suffered migraines. So I guess headaches (even strong ones) are nothing new.


----------



## james4beach

What is the latest European guidance on AZ? The last I heard, Germany has stopped using it for anyone under 60.









Germany suspends use of AstraZeneca COVID vaccine for under-60s


Germany has paused the use of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine for people under the age of 60 following concerns about rare blood clots.




www.euronews.com


----------



## Dilbert

I had fatigue 24 hours afterward, but woke next morning completely normal.


----------



## james4beach

Dilbert said:


> I had fatigue 24 hours afterward, but woke next morning completely normal.


If you're willing to share, roughly what age are you? Over 60?


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> What is the latest European guidance on AZ? The last I heard, Germany has stopped using it for anyone under 60.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany suspends use of AstraZeneca COVID vaccine for under-60s
> 
> 
> Germany has paused the use of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine for people under the age of 60 following concerns about rare blood clots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.euronews.com


They're being super cautious.

The researcher who found the "issue" says you shouldn't hesitate to take the AZ vaccine.
His recommendation, and the lack of data showing it's an increased risk ( 1 or 2 in a million is effectively no risk), is enough for me.


----------



## ian

Yes. 

Over 60. Got our first shot last 10 days ago. Was not certain what we would get but were were both willing to take any one of the three. It was Pfizer.


----------



## gibor365

Beaver101 said:


> My younger relatives who got the "Pfizer" vaccine suffered migraines. So I guess headaches (even strong ones) are nothing new.


No doubt I'd go for Pfizer or Moderna, All my relatives got them, some back in January and no one reported any side effects.... but the situation with AZ looks very fishy .... ihmo, it would be banned in Canada all together if we wouldn't get 1.5M from US.... 
Just visited Rexall website where i can register for AZ, practically all today spots are available ... or people don't know that they can register online or everyone is scared of it...
I;m much more scared from AZ that from Covid itself.... esp after my daughter got it (she finish 10 days quarantine couple of days ago) and described it like mild cold...3-4 first days she just had a bit soar throat , no fever, no difficulty sleeping etc...


----------



## gibor365

IMHO, similar dilemma is gonna be for many on CMF  , I also not excited that AZ gives only 70% or so efficiency. 
Also, my wife is 45 and definitely is not going to get AZ , 3 days mandatory quarantine very likely to be extended beyond Apr 21 and we need vaccines mostly for save travel ... 
I just don't see any benefits inserting some unknown liquid into my body


----------



## gibor365

ian said:


> Yes.
> 
> Over 60. Got our first shot last 10 days ago. Was not certain what we would get but were were both willing to take any one of the three. It was Pfizer.


I'd also get Pfizer 100%, my question is specific to AZ.
My mom is 100% against AZ (she got Moderna), my wife suggesting to get AZ ... Hell knows what to do !!!!!


----------



## james4beach

gibor365 said:


> I;m much more scared from AZ that from Covid itself.... esp after my daughter got it (she finish 10 days quarantine couple of days ago) and described it like mild cold.


I think you are misinterpreting the danger of COVID.

As I mentioned, I know 4 people who caught COVID (very young people), of which

2 ended up in hospital
1 had virtually nothing happen to him

Hospitals across Canada are full of rather young, healthy people who have serious COVID. If you are over age 25, you should be worried about the disease.


----------



## gibor365

james4beach said:


> I think you are misinterpreting the danger of COVID.
> 
> As I mentioned, I know 4 people who caught COVID (very young people) and two of them ended up in hospital. And one of the 4 had virtually nothing happen to him.
> 
> Hospitals across Canada are full of rather young, healthy people who have serious COVID. If you are over age 25, you should be worried about the disease.


james, imho, you are exaggerating ... I know couple of dozens people who had Covid (among my relatives and friends), only 1 visited for short time hospital ... for other it was like a flu...
and I suppose my daughter should have me genes 

I'm also kinda fatalist ... it's up yo G-d if I get Covid and what is gonna be end result.... with AZ , you on purpose injection a very controversial liquid....


----------



## gibor365

Just check life stats in Mississauga.... with population 722,000 , in my age bracket 50-59 , just 135 ever hospitalized (not even ICU) = 0.018% and 11 deaths = 0.0015% . this is extremely low


----------



## ian

This is really easy. If you are comfortable with the vaccine, whichever one, then take it.

If not don't. It is a personal decision. Everyone has an opinion. Decide and move forward. Just because we were vaccinated, or vaccinated with Pfizer does not in any way suggest that we are urging others to do the same or that our decision was the right one. It was right for us.


----------



## james4beach

gibor365 said:


> Just check life stats in Mississauga.... with population 722,000 , in my age bracket 50-59 , just 135 ever hospitalized (not even ICU) = 0.018% and 11 deaths = 0.0015% . this is extremely low


You are talking as if 772,000 people caught COVID. That's not what happened. Only a small number of people caught COVID, and 135 were hospitalized.

The important question is, among people who catch COVID, how many end up in hospital?


----------



## gibor365

ian said:


> This is really easy. If you are comfortable with the vaccine, whichever one, then take it.
> 
> If not don't. It is a personal decision. Everyone has an opinion. Decide and move forward. Just because we were vaccinated, or vaccinated with Pfizer does not in any way suggest that we are urging others to do the same or that our decision was the right one. It was right for us.


I completely understand .....but now, when I can book and get AZ in 1 hours....I'm kinda anxious . and I've never been anxious from fear to get Covid...
Just check official Ontario vaccination website... looks like you can book Pfizer or Moderna if you are 60+ ... maybe I opt to wait couple of months when I will be eligible


----------



## Beaver101

All I know at this point in time (April 5, 2021, a year + in a pandemic), you can't convince selfish people. I'm out of breath doing that.


----------



## gibor365

james4beach said:


> You are talking as if 772,000 people caught COVID. That's not what happened. Only a small number of people caught COVID, and 135 were hospitalized.
> 
> The important question is, among people who catch COVID, how many end up in hospital?


Depends what are looking for.... In order to get to Hospital, you first need to get Covid and it's only 0.018%... 
Actually nobody know how many got Covid as 80-90% are asymptomatic or very mild, they don;t even get reported


----------



## Beaver101

gibor365 said:


> I completely understand .....but now, when I can book and get AZ in 1 hours....I'm kinda anxious . and I've never been anxious from fear to get Covid...
> Just check official Ontario vaccination website... looks like you can book Pfizer or Moderna if you are 60+ ... maybe I opt to wait couple of months when I will be eligible


 ... 56 is still 4 years away from 60 ... LOL.

Correction: Based on post #25 below, 55 is still* 5 years* away from 60. LMAO.


----------



## newfoundlander61

gibor365 said:


> Also, if anyone already got AZ vaccine.....did you have some side effects? My brother's wife had AZ in UK several months ago and is telling that she had strong headache


I feel a bit off/lousy for about 3 hours the next morning and was fine for the rest of the day. Then felt off/lousy later in the evening, went to bed early and have felt fine since. Similar to how I feel after the annual flu shot. I will take the second AZ shot as soon as they will let me.


----------



## Eder

Gibor...I would take the AZ today. You can get the variant booster shot from a different manufacturer later. Do you think the millions in the UK all got side effects?


----------



## gibor365

Eder said:


> Gibor...I would take the AZ today. You can get the variant booster shot from a different manufacturer later. Do you think the millions in the UK all got side effects?


I posted some time ago question here , if I get AZ 1st shot, can I get 2nd shot from other pahrma....and I was told 
NO... and who knows... looking at our Health experts who changes opinions every 2nd day.... what are the chances that before time comes for 2nd AZ shot, it can be baned All together, esp. when 1.5M AZ sent from US get expired?


----------



## gibor365

as per Ontario vaccination booking, 60+ can book Pfizer and Moderna right now ... I'm 55, so maybe in 1 or 2 months I can book good vaccine?!
btw, is anyone 60+ tried to book in Peel? Curious on which date can you book now...


----------



## Money172375

gibor365 said:


> as per Ontario vaccination booking, 60+ can book Pfizer and Moderna right now ... I'm 55, so maybe in 1 or 2 months I can book good vaccine?!
> btw, is anyone 60+ tried to book in Peel? Curious on which date can you book now...


Apr 10


----------



## Dilbert

James, I’m 64. Gibor, I live in Mississauga and got the jab two weeks ago.


----------



## Eder

gibor365 said:


> I posted some time ago question here , if I get AZ 1st shot, can I get 2nd shot from other pahrma....and I was told
> NO... and who knows... looking at our Health experts who changes opinions every 2nd day.... what are the chances that before time comes for 2nd AZ shot, it can be baned All together, esp. when 1.5M AZ sent from US get expired?


Naw I meant get both AZ shots now...by December most likely you will need another round because of how slow the initial roll out is going...should be mixed in with your flu shot.


----------



## gibor365

Money172375 said:


> Apr 10


This is pretty good! So, after 60+, they probably gonna offer 55+ and it can happen within a month?!
Interesting that if I click on 60+, it tell me that I can get Pfizer or Moderna
If I click on 55+, it gives me only AZ


----------



## gibor365

So far , interesting results...on this forum , 32% said NO (out of 2 votes), on RFD forum 50% said NO and 39% YES ...
Still cannot decide ......


----------



## Bananatron

Am I wrong in thinking that in any other scenario AZ would have been told to go back to the drawing board, but because of the immediate need the rules are being bent?


----------



## gibor365

Bananatron said:


> Am I wrong in thinking that in any other scenario AZ would have been told to go back to the drawing board, but because of the immediate need the rules are being bent?


As I mentioned before, I'm sure 100% that it "would have been told to go back to the drawing board" , however, US got Canada "humanitarian aid" by giving 1.5M AZ vaccine that expired very soon


----------



## gibor365

Interesting article....was also thinking about it ... what if NACI change age brackets again?!








What does the AstraZeneca pause mean for young Canadians who already got one dose?


A 21-year-old Ontario woman feels misled after receiving her first dose of AstraZeneca, the first vaccine she could get, as she waits to hear next steps after vaccinations were paused in people under 55.




www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## gibor365

and only 53% trust AZ as per recent poll








Canadians’ trust in Pfizer, Moderna vaccines far outweigh AstraZeneca, poll suggests - National | Globalnews.ca


AstraZeneca also fared worse compared to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, which has been approved but is not yet available in Canada.




globalnews.ca


----------



## MrMatt

gibor365 said:


> and only 53% trust AZ as per recent poll
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canadians’ trust in Pfizer, Moderna vaccines far outweigh AstraZeneca, poll suggests - National | Globalnews.ca
> 
> 
> AstraZeneca also fared worse compared to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, which has been approved but is not yet available in Canada.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> globalnews.ca


Yeah, the antivaxxers are doing really so far.


----------



## sags

The AZ from the US was about to expire and they couldn't use it, so they "lent" it to us.

We have to pay them back........and they likely won't want AZ vaccine if they don't approve it. 

So what do we give them back......Pfizer, Moderna or cash ?


----------



## Covariance

Yes. Had a slight fever the evening of shot and a little off the next day. Perfectly fine from day two.

I understand people’s reluctance and concern. For me, the risk of getting COVID and associated issues are far higher than the risk of complications from the vaccine. In my locale the third wave is growing and therefore the risk of getting it is only getting worse.


----------



## MrMatt

Covariance said:


> I understand people’s reluctance and concern.


So do I, they can't do math, and are confused by the antivaxxer fearmongering.


----------



## Argonaut

I realize my following opinion is likely irrational and not based on statistics. I believe if you can see your own biases you're on the right track.

At this point I would get the Pfizer vaccine and probably not the other two. Pfizer has a brand name that I recognize and trust to a certain extent, whereas I'd never even heard of Moderna or AstraZeneca before COVID. Throw in the headlines from the AZ vaccine, and that's it.

I'm in my 30s though, so probably twiddling my thumbs for a while anyway.


----------



## sags

I am starting to wonder how many shares of AstraZeneca stock some of the AZ pumpers are stuck with.

The 52 week stock price 42.84 - 64.94......and it now sits at $49.55

The statistics that you are more likely to get struck by lightning are meaningless because I don't stand under the tallest steel pole in a lightning storm.

I don't expose myself to that kind of danger if I can prevent it.

Same as I don't stand in the middle of a busy 6 lane highway at rush hour because the "statistics" are that hardly anyone dies from being run over by a pickup truck towing a boat.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> So do I, they can't do math, and are confused by the antivaxxer fearmongering.


So you're accusing the GOC of being antivax? Why, in laymans terms is the AZ vaccine not available for people of all ages?

Under any other circumstances this vaccine wouldn't have seen the light of day.

Go ahead and take it, get your family to take it as well. I'll wait for Pfizer.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> So you're accusing the GOC of being antivax? Why, in laymans terms is the AZ vaccine not available for people of all ages?
> 
> Under any other circumstances this vaccine wouldn't have seen the light of day.
> 
> Go ahead and take it, get your family to take it as well. I'll wait for Pfizer.


There isn't any publicly available data justifying the restrictions on the AZ vaccine.
So either.
1. The data doesn't exist for efficacy/safety.
2. There is data that shows a problem, and they're not sharing it.


I won't accuse the GOC of being antivax, but I do think that they have allowed politics to infect the government, so maybe they're manipulating the data for some reason.

The current government is really challenging the tradition of non partisan government in Canada, and I find that idea terrifying. I don't want it to be like the US where they rebuild the executive branch of government after every election.


----------



## Eclectic12

Argonaut said:


> I realize my following opinion is likely irrational and not based on statistics. I believe if you can see your own biases you're on the right track.
> 
> At this point I would get the Pfizer vaccine and probably not the other two. Pfizer has a brand name that I recognize and trust to a certain extent, whereas I'd never even heard of Moderna or AstraZeneca before COVID. Throw in the headlines from the AZ vaccine, and that's it ...


Interesting .... Moderna makes sense as it was formed in 2010.

Maybe the AstraZeneca is a regional thing for seeing their name in Canada?

They have been in Canada since 1999, the same year Astra AB (founded in 1913) merged with the Zeneca Group PCL (spun out of Imperial Chemical Industries six year earlier). Imperial Chemical Industries started into pharma in the 1940's.

Their current list for Canada has about forty products, minus the covid1-9 vaccine.


It's the Oxford- AstraZeneca vaccine so I suspect that like BioTech did the development and Pfizer did the manufacturing/distribution, AstraZeneca may fulfil the same role.
Similarly, Moderna did the development and has contracted manufacturing/distribution to multiple companies, including the Swiss Lonza Group.


'Course if you want to worry, BioTech was setup the same year as Moderna.


Cheers


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> There isn't any publicly available data justifying the restrictions on the AZ vaccine.
> So either.
> 1. The data doesn't exist for efficacy/safety.
> 2. There is data that shows a problem, and they're not sharing it.
> 
> 
> I won't accuse the GOC of being antivax, but I do think that they have allowed politics to infect the government, so maybe they're manipulating the data for some reason.
> 
> The current government is really challenging the tradition of non partisan government in Canada, and I find that idea terrifying. I don't want it to be like the US where they rebuild the executive branch of government after every election.


so, whats with the antivax comments?


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> so, whats with the antivax comments?


People pushing the "don't take AZ", despite there being no available data to suggest there is a problem.
No different than saying "don't take the flu shot, because it causes Autism"


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> People pushing the "don't take AZ", despite there being no available data to suggest there is a problem.
> No different than saying "don't take the flu shot, because it causes Autism"


As a sensible person, doesn't the pausing or outright stopping of usage in certain countries, including Canada, suggest that there may be some data that suggests there is a problem?


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> As a sensible person, doesn't the pausing or outright stopping of usage in certain countries, including Canada, suggest that there may be some data that suggests there is a problem?


It suggests an abundance of caution.
I think that if they suspect a problem, they should immediately investigate until they know if it is a problem or is not.

Just to be clear, if there is a reason to suspect a serious problem, they should stop use until they confirm the existance and scope of the problem. This is what is being done, and guess what, they haven't actually found a problem yet.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> It suggests an abundance of caution.
> I think that if they suspect a problem, they should immediately investigate until they know if it is a problem or is not.
> 
> Just to be clear, if there is a reason to suspect a serious problem, they should stop use until they confirm the existance and scope of the problem. This is what is being done, and guess what, they haven't actually found a problem yet.


Then its settled. It is not anti-vax, it is simply an abundance of caution. And people are certainly able to wait until the data is conclusive, rather than to be pressured to take a vaccine where it is not perfectly clear yet how safe it is.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Then its settled. It is not anti-vax, it is simply an abundance of caution. And people are certainly able to wait until the data is conclusive, rather than to be pressured to take a vaccine where it is not perfectly clear yet how safe it is.


None of the vaccines will be conclusively clear on how safe they are for years.


But based on the data available today, from tens of millions of people, all the major vaccines appear extremely safe.


----------



## like_to_retire

Clear link between AstraZeneca and rare blood clots in brain.

_'In my opinion, we can now say it,' said Marco Cavaleri, chair of the vaccine evaluation team at the European Medicines Agency_


----------



## gibor365

sags said:


> The AZ from the US was about to expire and they couldn't use it, so they "lent" it to us.
> 
> We have to pay them back........and they likely won't want AZ vaccine if they don't approve it.
> 
> *So what do we give them back......Pfizer, Moderna or cash ?*


Snowbirds  they already vaccinated hundreds thousands of them


----------



## MrMatt

like_to_retire said:


> Clear link between AstraZeneca and rare blood clots in brain.
> 
> _'In my opinion, we can now say it,' said Marco Cavaleri, chair of the vaccine evaluation team at the European Medicines Agency_


Yes just released (ie new data) that shows it's more common than initially thought.
5 in a million is still really good odds.









Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis (CVST)


Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis occurs when a blood clot forms in the brain’s venous sinuses. This prevents blood from draining out of the brain. As a result, blood cells may break and leak blood into the brain tissues, forming a hemorrhage.




www.hopkinsmedicine.org




CVST is a rare form of stroke. It affects about 5 people in 1 million each year.

So you have a 5 in a million chance of getting this blood clot in a year, or after taking the AZ vaccine. I wonder if they are related.
I agree with the abundance of caution, but we're talking about something incredibly rare.

It's clear that this is an incredibly low risk.
I expect when they investigate the risk profile, they'll find that the risk for most people is much lower, or likely negligible.


----------



## Eder

The biggest problem is the AZ shot is being provided at cost, therefore prone to bad publicity. They should have charged $50/shot.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> Yes just released (ie new data) that shows it's more common than initially thought.
> 5 in a million is still really good odds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis (CVST)
> 
> 
> Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis occurs when a blood clot forms in the brain’s venous sinuses. This prevents blood from draining out of the brain. As a result, blood cells may break and leak blood into the brain tissues, forming a hemorrhage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hopkinsmedicine.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CVST is a rare form of stroke. It affects about 5 people in 1 million each year.
> 
> So you have a 5 in a million chance of getting this blood clot in a year, or after taking the AZ vaccine. I wonder if they are related.
> I agree with the abundance of caution, but we're talking about something incredibly rare.
> 
> It's clear that this is an incredibly low risk.
> I expect when they investigate the risk profile, they'll find that the risk for most people is much lower, or likely negligible.


If a sensible person had the choice between a vaccine with a 1:200,000 chance of giving that person a blood clot or one with a zero chance of giving that person a blood clot, what would the sensible person choose?

"Very low odds" are relative. Any other scenario this vaccine wouldn't have seen the light of day.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> If a sensible person had the choice between a vaccine with a 1:200,000 chance of giving that person a blood clot or one with a zero chance of giving that person a blood clot, what would the sensible person choose?
> 
> "Very low odds" are relative. Any other scenario this vaccine wouldn't have seen the light of day.


Given that you already have a 1:1 000 chance of getting a blood clot this year, and a 1:200 000 chance of getting the exact type of blood clot that AZ vaccine is correlated to this year. 
I don't see why it's a big deal.

It's also important to note that they _think_ that middle age women are more susceptible., at which point the odds for others groups are lower than 5 in a million, at which point it again disappears into the realm of normal. (ie every 10 weeks, 1 in a million ppl get this type of blood clot)

Actually the odds of this being found in any trial are nearly nil, they only test tens of thousands, it's quite likely that not a single person in any trial had this blood clot.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> Given that you already have a 1:1 000 chance of getting a blood clot this year, and a 1:200 000 chance of getting the exact type of blood clot that AZ vaccine is correlated to this year.
> I don't see why it's a big deal.
> 
> It's also important to note that they _think_ that middle age women are more susceptible., at which point the odds for others groups are lower than 5 in a million, at which point it again disappears into the realm of normal. (ie every 10 weeks, 1 in a million ppl get this type of blood clot)
> 
> Actually the odds of this being found in any trial are nearly nil, they only test tens of thousands, it's quite likely that not a single person in any trial had this blood clot.


I think you know as well as I do that terminology like "quite likely", "they think", "probably", etc have no place in scientific vaccine trials so I kindly ask you to refrain from shaming those who are skeptical of the AZ vaccine until the science is settled. 

Bullying and shaming is no way to gain vaccine acceptance.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> I think you know as well as I do that terminology like "quite likely", "they think", "probably", etc have no place in scientific vaccine trials so I kindly ask you to refrain from shaming those who are skeptical of the AZ vaccine until the science is settled.
> 
> Bullying and shaming is no way to gain vaccine acceptance.


Actually they're perfectly fine words.
If you test 30k people, it is statistically unlikely that you're going to detect a 1 in 200k impact. 

"they think", it's completely reasonable in a comentary.
There have been very rare cases of unusual blood clots accompanied by low levels of blood platelets (components that help blood to clot) after vaccination. The reported cases were *almost all* in women under 55.




__





COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca: benefits still outweigh the risks despite possible link to rare blood clots with low platelets - European Medicines Agency


COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca: benefits still outweigh the risks despite possible link to rare blood clots with low platelets




www.ema.europa.eu





You're picking on phrasing rather than the content, I think that suggests you know you're wrong.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> Actually they're perfectly fine words.
> If you test 30k people, it is statistically unlikely that you're going to detect a 1 in 200k impact.
> 
> "they think", it's completely reasonable in a comentary.
> There have been very rare cases of unusual blood clots accompanied by low levels of blood platelets (components that help blood to clot) after vaccination. The reported cases were *almost all* in women under 55.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca: benefits still outweigh the risks despite possible link to rare blood clots with low platelets - European Medicines Agency
> 
> 
> COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca: benefits still outweigh the risks despite possible link to rare blood clots with low platelets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ema.europa.eu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're picking on phrasing rather than the content, I think that suggests you know you're wrong.


I realize that the AZ vaccine is "probably" safe. 

I'll wait until every country drops the "probably", like what would happen with any other vaccine trial. 

Do you have a problem with that?


----------



## gibor365

> The reported cases were *almost all* in women under 55.


 This is *fishy*.....so if somebody is 54 - it's not OK and same person who turns 55 - it's just fine?! 
In Canada they go not per date of birth, but per year of birth .... In reality I'm 54 (until late November) - so I shouldn't be allowed to get AZ, but because I was born 1966 - I'm allowed


----------



## MrMatt

MarkWilkinson said:


> When it comes to vaccines... I'd like to receive one. However, I still want to make sure that there are no side effects. Well, I know it is totally normal but it should not be too serious. I just want to make sure that this vaccine won't harm my body in the near future. But If I have the chance, I will grab the opportunity. I'll take chances. If other people need it, I'd probably give it to him or her. In this situation, we should recognize who needs it first rather than being selfish and only thinking about ourselves.


All medical interventions have risks and side effects.
So far the COVID19 vaccines have very few serious side effects and are low risk. 

The problem is our people don't understand math.


----------



## MrMatt

Oh, and 1 in 200k for AZ (assuming true and applicable to you)
vs 1 in 3 post covid neurological/metal disorders
Sign me up.









A third of COVID-19 survivors suffer neurological or mental disorders, study finds


One in three COVID-19 survivors in a study of more than 230,000 mostly American patients were diagnosed with a brain or psychiatric disorder within six months, according to a new study.




www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## gibor365

Another problem with AZ that it's only 10% against South African variant ... Now UK one is dominating, but who knows what will be next








Oxford Covid vaccine has 10% efficacy against South African variant, study suggests


Small-scale trial of vaccine shows it offers very little protection against mild to moderate infection




www.theguardian.com


----------



## gibor365

__





In BC we were originally told that people over 65 should not take Astra Zenica vaccine due to side effects. Now saying that those 55 and under shouldn't take it for same reason. Do you feel this misleading? | Tellwut.com







www.tellwut.com


----------



## cainvest

gibor365 said:


> Another problem with AZ that it's only 10% against South African variant ... Now UK one is dominating, but who knows what will be next
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oxford Covid vaccine has 10% efficacy against South African variant, study suggests
> 
> 
> Small-scale trial of vaccine shows it offers very little protection against mild to moderate infection
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


On the plus side for AZ ...

_None of the people in the trial died, became severely ill or had to be hospitalized. Efficacy against severe COVID-19 arising from the B.1.351 variant was not assessed in the study because the participants were at lower risk, researchers at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg said in their analysis. The study has not yet been peer-reviewed._


----------



## MrMatt

cainvest said:


> On the plus side for AZ ...
> 
> _None of the people in the trial died, became severely ill or had to be hospitalized. Efficacy against severe COVID-19 arising from the B.1.351 variant was not assessed in the study because the participants were at lower risk, researchers at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg said in their analysis. The study has not yet been peer-reviewed._


Really, at this point it's a no brainer, all the approved vaccines dramatically improve your chances.
If I was a 45yr old woman with a history of blood problems & clotting I'd reconsider, but I'm not, so I'd grab AZ today, if the government would let me.
Heck I'd stand outside waiting for the first no-show.


----------



## james4beach

MrMatt said:


> Really, at this point it's a no brainer, all the approved vaccines dramatically improve your chances.
> If I was a 45yr old woman with a history of blood problems & clotting I'd reconsider, but I'm not, so I'd grab AZ today, if the government would let me.
> Heck I'd stand outside waiting for the first no-show.


I wrote earlier (and still believe) that only for young women, specifically, there is concern. I gave the example in some other thread about a 25 year old woman. For her, there isn't much danger of Covid death and yet the AZ blood clotting issue is a concern.

But if someone was, say, a 60 year old *male* it's an entirely different story. At age 60 you're in significant danger from dying of Covid and I agree that it's a no-brainer to AZ, or JNJ, or any vaccine you can get ASAP.


----------



## tony777

Hello,

My wife and I, both age 67, got the Astra Zennica shot on March 30. We both had similar side effects - day of the shot, side effects = zero. Nothing. Next morning, woke up with vaguely sore arm at the injection site. Same as every year for the flu shot. Soreness lasted through the day. Morning of second day, side effects = zero. Nothing. And nothing since. No headaches, nada.
I personally know 1 person whose whole family got Covid, one after the other. His advice to me was "Tony, this is a nasty, nasty thing. Do NOT mess with it, get the first vaccine you can get".
I hope this helps, cheers,
Tony


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> I wrote earlier (and still believe) that only for young women, specifically, there is concern. I gave the example in some other thread about a 25 year old woman. For her, there isn't much danger of Covid death and yet the AZ blood clotting issue is a concern.
> 
> But if someone was, say, a 60 year old *male* it's an entirely different story. At age 60 you're in significant danger from dying of Covid and I agree that it's a no-brainer to AZ, or JNJ, or any vaccine you can get ASAP.


James
1 in 3 people suffers continuing neurological or mental disorders after getting COVID.

I think for women in the suspect age, prioritize them for the other vaccines, but the rest of us AZ is just fine.


----------



## dubmac

I just got the AZ vaccine. I'm 60 & in BC (Van-city). Life is good.
Why knock yourself out with all the scrutinizing its efficacy, % this and that, etc? The vaccine was put through all the paces along with the others - they wouldn't offer it if it didn't work. 
Tomorrow, my wife gets hers.
Now...I think I'll drink that bottle of red wine that I have in the cellar to celebrate. We're another day closer to putting this thing behind us.


----------



## Thal81

I'm 40 years old and I would totally hop in my car right now if I could go get the AZ vaccine.


----------



## medici

I'm 59...got the 1st shot of AZ last week... Felt slightly feverish, tired for a day and a half as expected (while antibodies were being created) and then was fine after that.


----------



## james4beach

I changed my response to "no" because I'm in my 30s. I looked at the rate of blood clots in Germany, Norway, UK, and then looked at the rates of COVID related fatalities and serious conditions at my age group. I was also mistaken earlier when I thought that only women had these side effects. Males are getting them too.

I believe that at my age, the AZ shot would not make me safer, on the balance of risks. And yes I am considering the blood clot risk from COVID. In any case, Canadian health officials appear to agree with what I'm saying and have already updated the policy.

However I suspect that anyone over age 50 is much better off getting the AZ shot.


----------



## like_to_retire

james4beach said:


> However I suspect that anyone over age 50 is much better off getting the AZ shot.


Not because the risk isn't there for blood clots, but because they would have a much higher risk of death from COVID than you would?

ltr


----------



## james4beach

like_to_retire said:


> Not because the risk isn't there for blood clots, but because they would have a much higher risk of death from COVID than you would?


Yes I think so. The risk of death from COVID (and related complications) increases very dramatically with age. COVID is insanely more hazardous to a 70 year old than a 25 year old.

If you were to plot it, I think the blood clot risk is closer to a "flat" curve by age, whereas the COVID/death risk increases exponentially. That's my understanding of it anyway.


----------



## like_to_retire

james4beach said:


> If you were to plot it, I think the blood clot risk is closer to a "flat" curve by age, whereas the COVID/death risk increases exponentially.


Yeah, exponential seems about right. There's a huge risk of death for seniors from COVID, and this is why I am so annoyed that they arbitrarily decided in Canada to extend the interval between first and second dose without any evidence that it's anything but a reckless move.












ltr


----------



## james4beach

like_to_retire said:


> There's a huge risk of death for seniors from COVID, and this is why I am so annoyed that they arbitrarily decided in Canada to extend the interval between first and second dose without any evidence that it's anything but a reckless move.


I don't think that one was a bad decision and it wasn't completely arbitrary. Immune responses to vaccinations are relatively well known among all the different vaccines from over the years. So they are using known patterns in vaccine's lasting immunity, combined with the fact that the MRNA vaccines produced an unexpectedly powerful immune response after first vaccination. I think there is a scientific basis for their decision on extending the interval.

With vaccines, immunity also does not drop off particularly quickly. It's always a slow decline in protection.

I think what is often glossed over is that Pfizer and Moderna themselves just guessed at the interval as well. So although it was their original guidance, it was somewhat of a guess, and was actually based on very limited data about the power of the first shot's immune response. We actually have more data on that first shot immune response, so we actually have better data now than what Pfizer based their guidance on.

And the first shot has turned out to pack more punch than what everyone initially expected.


----------



## like_to_retire

james4beach said:


> So although it was their original guidance, it was somewhat of a guess, and was actually based on very limited data about the power of the first shot's immune response.


So it would be so easy for Pfizer to clear this up by commenting on this issue - but they don't. Telling.

ltr


----------



## cainvest

like_to_retire said:


> There's a huge risk of death for seniors from COVID, and this is why I am so annoyed that they arbitrarily decided in Canada to extend the interval between first and second dose without any evidence that it's anything but a reckless move.


There is data available on one vs two shots so you are either not looking or ignoring it. Also, at least here in MB, some people are curently receiving their second shots on a daily basis.


----------



## like_to_retire

cainvest said:


> There is data available on one vs two shots so you are either not looking or ignoring it.


Please avail us of the data of one vs two shots for a 4 month interval. I'd love to see it.

ltr


----------



## cainvest

like_to_retire said:


> Please avail us of the data of one vs two shots for a 4 month interval. I'd love to see it.


I believe I've posted before on that. Sorry, don't have time right now so maybe try googling it.


----------



## Money172375

I’m leaning towards the current strategy being the better one. Death rates have fallen amongst the elderly with one shot. Yet, young adults are being hospitalized and dying....the ”everybody get one shirt first” may be the way to go. If immunity only lasts 6 months, we may be getting shots twice a year anyway.


----------



## Bananatron

Money172375 said:


> I’m leaning towards the current strategy being the better one. Death rates have fallen amongst the elderly with one shot. Yet, young adults are being hospitalized and dying....the ”everybody get one shirt first” may be the way to go. If immunity only lasts 6 months, we may be getting shots twice a year anyway.


Of course it's the better decision. We can always adjust the plan if we start to see serious effects on people with only one shot but it's not looking like that right now. 

I find it quite selfish for those to want the peace of mind of "full" protection at the expense of working aged people in essential services jobs getting no protection.


----------



## like_to_retire

Bananatron said:


> I find it quite selfish for those to want the peace of mind of "full" protection at the expense of working aged people in essential services jobs getting no protection.


Yeah, imagine the selfishness of an 85 year old wanting a full vaccination. They only have a 7900 times more chance of dying than an unvaccinated 18 year old (that I saw on TV being vaccinated in Toronto today). Those darn old people.

ltr


----------



## Bananatron

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, imagine the selfishness of an 85 year old wanting a full vaccination. They only have a 7900 times more chance of dying than an unvaccinated 18 year old (that I saw on TV being vaccinated in Toronto today). Those darn old people.
> 
> ltr


It's funny you used that age. My uncle is 85 and he was willing to give up his turn to someone who really needed it, like a teacher. It's not a big deal for him to lay low for a few more months. 

That said, we're not doing that. The most vulnerable are getting priority, and until I can see data that spreading the doses out is dangerous, I'll continue to support the current plan.


----------



## like_to_retire

Bananatron said:


> The most vulnerable are getting priority, and until I can see data that spreading the doses out is dangerous, I'll continue to support the current plan.


Yeah, let's vaccinate those 20 year old's that I see on the news partying and giving each other the virus. What do they care, they'll be fine. Let's take and give them all the second dose that the seniors require to be fully vaccinated. Even _"Canada’s top scientist is advising against extending the time between doses of the COVID-19 vaccines to four months in seniors, arguing the research isn’t there to justify the delay for that population and those with pre-existing conditions"._ 

I don't see how the most vulnerable are getting priority when you give their vaccine to a 20 year old, but that's OK with you as you'll wait until the data shows it's dangerous and too late.

ltr


----------



## james4beach

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, let's vaccinate those 20 year old's that I see on the news partying and giving each other the virus.


I know what you mean (and I'm just as angry at them) but there's another angle here. The 20-30 year olds are working all over the place. They are the grocery store people, restaurant staff, shipping & loading crews for store deliveries etc.

We need to vaccinate them because they will inevitably spread the virus. Even if they stopped all partying and socializing, they will still spread it because they are on the front lines and many of them still have to go into workplaces where they are forced to have close exposure.

And many of them live in shared housing, have roommates. All of this is no fault of their own, but their age & jobs in society means they are at high risk of spreading it to ALL of us.


----------



## Bananatron

james4beach said:


> I know what you mean (and I'm just as angry at them) but there's another angle here. The 20-30 year olds are working all over the place. They are the grocery store people, restaurant staff, shipping & loading crews for store deliveries etc.
> 
> We need to vaccinate them because they will inevitably spread the virus. Even if they stopped all partying and socializing, they will still spread it because they are on the front lines and many of them still have to go into workplaces where they are forced to have close exposure.
> 
> And many of them live in shared housing, have roommates. All of this is no fault of their own, but their age & jobs in society means they are at high risk of spreading it to ALL of us.


Thats a good point, and I'm sure we are all aware of the variants and how they are taking out younger and younger people. People in the workforce, anywhere from age 35-70. These variants are running rampant and it just doesn't make sense to double down on the elderly, "just to be sure" while leaving the people who are keeping society running exposed to unnecessary risks. I'm talking essential workers, who can't work from home. The people that remove your garbage from your front step, make sure there is water in your pipes, power in your plugins, food on the shelves etc. 

The current plan is almost certainly going to save hundreds if not thousands of lives as opposed to making sure the 85 year olds get their second dose before the city bus driver does.

Now if some data emerges that suggests fading protection at the 3 month mark, then I certainly support giving the most vulnerable priority on their second dose. Even then, we'd likely have saved more lives by giving more people the first shot, than finding out "when its too late" for the elderly.


----------



## james4beach

Bananatron said:


> The people that remove your garbage from your front step, make sure there is water in your pipes, power in your plugins, food on the shelves etc.


Yup. Think of all the teachers out there getting significant risk exposure. Transit drivers, front line staff working at Tim Hortons, fast food, grocery stores, restaurants. These all tend to be younger people.


----------



## OptsyEagle

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, imagine the selfishness of an 85 year old wanting a full vaccination. They only have a 7900 times more chance of dying than an unvaccinated 18 year old (that I saw on TV being vaccinated in Toronto today). Those darn old people.
> 
> ltr


Are you talking about an 85 year old who would not have been vaccinated if we had of listened to the selfish people who demanded a double dose?

You must be because I don't think we have a statistic yet that proves that all the 85 year olds that we were able to vaccinate, with a single dose, still have a 7900 times chance of dying over anyone of any age, from Covid-19.


----------



## Eder

I'm pretty sure every 85 year old has a pretty good chance of dying even without a pandemic going on.


----------



## cainvest

like_to_retire said:


> Please avail us of the data of one vs two shots for a 4 month interval. I'd love to see it.


Sorry, nothing on the 4 month interval as of yet but in regards to your previous post I bolded a significant part.


like_to_retire said:


> *There's a huge risk of death for seniors from COVID*, and this is why I am so annoyed that they arbitrarily decided in Canada to extend the interval between first and second dose without any evidence that it's anything but a reckless move.


There is data showing that even one shot significantly decreases the chances of being hospitalized.

So given we're limited in vaccine supply the question becomes, do you vaccinate as many high risk as possible and as soon as possible or roll it out at half the rate giving full vaccinations to the high risk?

I don't know how things are rolling out where you are but here we haven't even finished the 60-79 age group yet.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> Yup. Think of all the teachers out there getting significant risk exposure. Transit drivers, front line staff working at Tim Hortons, fast food, grocery stores, restaurants. These all tend to be younger people.



The service industry jobs, they're scary.
Imagine thousands of people who think that it's okay to go out... walking inches away all day long.


----------



## sags

It probably isn't too healthy to be a school bus driver either.

Inside a confined space with a bunch of potential virus spreaders sounds risky.


----------



## like_to_retire

sags said:


> It probably isn't too healthy to be a school bus driver either.
> 
> Inside a confined space with a bunch of potential virus spreaders sounds risky.


I suspect they have the windows open, drawing the air out the back of the bus.

ltr


----------



## Bananatron

like_to_retire said:


> I suspect they have the windows open, drawing the air out the back of the bus.
> 
> ltr


Well who needs vaccines when you can just do that.


----------



## Mechanic

Maybe there will be a class action down the road for getting astra zeneca ? It's almost like a speculative stock buy 🤣


----------



## MrMatt

Mechanic said:


> Maybe there will be a class action down the road for getting astra zeneca ? It's almost like a speculative stock buy 🤣


No, the manufacturers have been granted immunity.
AZ isn't really any worse or riskier than the other vaccines anyway.
They're statistically the same (look at the confidence intervals)


----------



## james4beach

I phoned into a call-in show, where a doctor / public health expert was answering questions about AZ and other shots.

I told them that I understand the severe AZ side effects are rare at 1 in 100,000 but expressed my concern that for *younger* people, like those of us in our 20s and 30s, COVID infections may actually not be that dangerous. Why should I (as a young guy) get a shot that might be as dangerous as COVID?

Her response was an honest one: she agreed that COVID is less harmful to very young people, and said that "even if a vaccination is about as dangerous as COVID" that it's still better for everyone to get vaccinated, so that we protect the broader public (protect each other).

It was refreshing to get an honest answer like that, but that's still a VERY tough pitch to make to younger people.

They should take a medicine, when it's doubtful it offers them significant protection, mainly to protect baby boomers? Really?


----------



## cainvest

james4beach said:


> They should take a medicine, when it's doubtful it offers them significant protection, mainly to protect baby boomers? Really?


Considering the numbers for the 30-39 group for hospitalization/ICU are climbing to about half of the 50-59 group, maybe it is more than just trying to protect older people. Also, less spread means less mutations so less chance for worse strains for everyone.


----------



## Spudd

I recall an infographic that showed the only age group where it didn't make sense to take the AZ vaccine was the 20-29 group. But even that group is being hospitalized at higher rates now with the new variants. 

As a 40-something I am eagerly awaiting my turn for the AZ vaccine. They just opened it up to 40+ in Ontario but so far none of my local pharmacies have spots available.


----------



## james4beach

Spudd said:


> I recall an infographic that showed the only age group where it didn't make sense to take the AZ vaccine was the 20-29 group. But even that group is being hospitalized at higher rates now with the new variants.


Yeah I want to emphasize, I am talking about very young people. There is no question that someone who's over 50 or over 60 should get AZ shot. It's a no-brainer; they are better off with the vaccine.

If you're over 50, you really should get the AZ shot without hestitation.



cainvest said:


> Considering the numbers for the 30-39 group for hospitalization/ICU are climbing to about half of the 50-59 group, maybe it is more than just trying to protect older people. Also, less spread means less mutations so less chance for worse strains for everyone.


I keep hearing officials say this, but I spent some time researching this on the weekend and it's not true for the BC data. I'm going to analyze it again when the data comes out on Wednesday. The nice thing about the BC data reports is that it nicely breaks down hospitalizations and ICU by age category, which I can't find for Ontario.

The BC data does show an increase in the absolute number of young people admitted to hospital, but it appeared to be proportional, and there were similar increases in older people. So it's true that "there are more young people in hospital than ever before" but, I didn't see evidence of a notable jump *specifically* of younger people.

It could be the stats I'm looking at are lagging, though. I will continue analyzing the official reports as they come out.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> I phoned into a call-in show, where a doctor / public health expert was answering questions about AZ and other shots.
> 
> I told them that I understand the severe AZ side effects are rare at 1 in 100,000 but expressed my concern that for *younger* people, like those of us in our 20s and 30s, COVID infections may actually not be that dangerous. Why should I (as a young guy) get a shot that might be as dangerous as COVID?


But unless you're under 20 COVID19 is way more dangerous than the vaccines.

CFR 20-20 - 0.07% = 700 per million
CFR 30-39 - 0.21% = 2100 per million
That's case fatality rate. Many survivors have serious long term impacts.

Source


https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/ncov/epi/2020/06/covid19-epi-case-identification-age-only-template.pdf?la=en


Table 1

Note this is data from last year, and a quick google.
we know the variants are even worse.

The right answer is that the death rate from COVID is at least a hundred times higher than the vaccine, even before we start looking at the variants.


Also as others have or will suggest, it's also care.
The ICUs in Ontario are full, when people stop getting proper care, the death rate will increase.


----------



## james4beach

MrMatt said:


> But unless you're under 20 COVID19 is way more dangerous than the vaccines.
> 
> CFR 20-20 - 0.07% = 700 per million
> CFR 30-39 - 0.21% = 2100 per million
> That's case fatality rate. Many survivors have serious long term impacts.
> 
> Source
> https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/ncov/epi/2020/06/covid19-epi-case-identification-age-only-template.pdf?la=en  Table 1


Thank you, this is very useful and I had not seen this before. I was looking for stats like this.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> Thank you, this is very useful and I had not seen this before. I was looking for stats like this.


As the discoverer of the extremely rare AZ issue, said, there is no reason to hestitate.

I wish they'd actually push more stats to put this in context.
It's also important to note that we're comparing dying from COVID19 to getting a blood clot.
They even have a treatment protocol for vaccine caused blood clots.

Heck, if you drive a mile to get the shot, you're more likley to get in a car accident on the way, than to get a blood clot.








Rates of Motor Vehicle Crashes, Injuries and Deaths in Relation to Driver Age, United States, 2014-2015 - AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety


This Research Brief presents updated data on crash risk using data on crashes from the US DOT in conjunction with data on driving mileage from the AAA Foundation's American Driving Survey.



aaafoundation.org





Who here hesistates to drive a mile because of the risk of a car accident, or puts off that 100mile trip because of the risk of a fatal car accident.

People are actually emotionally unable to understand, quantify and compare risk, it's part of our risk adverse psychology.

I'd just like to note that I'm making a sincere effort to not call out people for being stupid or dumb for not getting this.
It's that they honestly don't get the math, and/or they are unable to "trust the numbers". Which even I have trouble with at times. 
These aren't math problems, they're emotional problems. That's why emotional intelligence is getting so much attention these days.


----------



## james4beach

MrMatt said:


> I wish they'd actually push more stats to put this in context.


Yes, exactly. I want the stats.

I found this journal paper with Case Fatality Rate in Canada up to December 2020, so it's quite recent.

I haven't read the whole paper yet, but it's amazing how much the fatality rate varies. There's also a lot of uncertainty due to correct identification both of infections AND deaths resulting from covid.

The fatality rate estimates are
20-29 ... 0.02%
30-39 ... 0.05%

Part of the discrepancy from that earlier Ontario data is that we are talking about *so few total deaths* for these younger groups, that the stats will jump around. In all of Canada last year, there were only 15 deaths of age 20-29.

So what does that mean? For 100,000 infections, an estimated 20 deaths would occur in the youngest group. In comparison the blood clot would be 1.

Realistically, not everyone is going to catch COVID, but even if half of the population did, that's still makes COVID more dangerous by 10:1 margin

So yes I would agree, even for the youngest, it appears that COVID is more dangerous than the AstraZeneca vaccine. But I want to read this paper more carefully.


----------



## james4beach

After looking at these stats and running some estimates for my own age, I changed my vote to "yes"


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> So what does that mean? For 100,000 infections, an estimated 20 deaths would occur in the youngest group. In comparison the blood clot would be 1.
> 
> Realistically, not everyone is going to catch COVID, but even if half of the population did, that's still makes COVID more dangerous by 10:1 margin


No more dangerous by much more than 10:1
You're comparing a treatable blood clot to death, you're also ignoring all the longstanding impacts of COVID19 other than death.

And again, you're ignoring the more dangerous variants we know about.

Glad you decided on yes, but it really should be a hell yes, get out of my way, I'll fight you for it yes.


----------



## Money172375

Twitter is alive with Gen Xerox pumped to get AZ. We ate pop tarts, babysat by the [email protected] after school, latch keys, lap belts in cars, fast food, sugary drinks, oral contraceptive......bring it on!


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> But unless you're under 20 COVID19 is way more dangerous than the vaccines.
> 
> CFR 20-20 - 0.07% = 700 per million
> CFR 30-39 - 0.21% = 2100 per million
> That's case fatality rate. Many survivors have serious long term impacts.
> 
> Source
> 
> 
> https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/ncov/epi/2020/06/covid19-epi-case-identification-age-only-template.pdf?la=en
> 
> 
> Table 1
> 
> Note this is data from last year, and a quick google.
> we know the variants are even worse.
> 
> The right answer is that the death rate from COVID is at least a hundred times higher than the vaccine, even before we start looking at the variants.
> 
> 
> Also as others have or will suggest, it's also care.
> The ICUs in Ontario are full, when people stop getting proper care, the death rate will increase.


Alberta has zero deaths out of 35000+ cases in the 19 and under age group, and 19 deaths in about 65,000 for the 20-40 demographic. That's about 292 per 1,000,000.

Both have similar enough numbers to combine. Also, this includes those with co morbidities, the chance of death for a healthy zoomer or millennial is essentially nil.


Icu rates line up more with your numbers. 
Source:



https://www.alberta.ca/stats/covid-19-alberta-statistics.htm#severe-outcomes


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Icu rates line up more with your numbers.


Matters what dataset you source, which is why I specified it. I used publicly available CFR data, and you also used publicly available data, I think we both chose good sources.
I'd love to have better and more clear data, also variant related data as that's what's really driving it this time.

Maybe blood clot/ICU is actually a more apt comparison, as it reflects "serious, but not necessarily fatal", though in my opinion I prefer counting deaths to get rid of the decision bias.

*In any case it's pretty clear that the Vaccines (AZ or Pfizer/Moderna) are way safer than COVID for pretty much all adults.*

I think when we get the data on variants, the picture may change. Initial data suggested the UK variant was more lethal, now I think they are suggesting it just spreads faster.
The second thing is that these CFR's are with hospitalization and staff and drugs, we have bed, staff & drug shortages now, which could result in worse outcomes for similar patients.


----------



## james4beach

My friend who's just a couple years older than me, early 40s, is now on a AZ waiting list at a nearby pharmacy and could get vaccinated this week (in BC).

He said that he had even seen a local pharmacy giving walk-in shots on the spot, but when he discovered that they had just run out. Their shots were expiring. It seems nearly certain he will get vaccinated this week due to the availability of AZ in pharmacies around us.

Basically this guy is getting vaccinated 3 months ahead of schedule.


----------



## cainvest

james4beach said:


> My friend who's just a couple years older than me, early 40s, is now on a AZ waiting list at a nearby pharmacy and could get vaccinated this week (in BC).


I don't think the AZ supply is going to last long with the age dropping to 40. Also not sure what the AZ supply timeline is like for Canada.


----------



## milhouse

james4beach said:


> Basically this guy is getting vaccinated 3 months ahead of schedule.


I'm guessing it's more like a month and a half as the provincial health website seems to be showing the 40-44 cohort as May/June.

I was going to grab an open slot next week at the pharmacy down the block and in the time it took for me to walk over to the kitchen and ask the missus if she had a preference what day she wanted to go, all the slots were gone.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole

Friend of mine who is 73 got the jab a week ago along with his wife and sister in law. He is fine, both women got sick and haven't got over it yet. Meanwhile I don't know anyone who has Covid or ever had it. I'm retired, live in the country, and go to the store once a week and practice social distancing wear a mask and take vitamin D. So no, will not be taking any vaccine any time soon.


----------



## andrewf

james4beach said:


> I phoned into a call-in show, where a doctor / public health expert was answering questions about AZ and other shots.
> 
> I told them that I understand the severe AZ side effects are rare at 1 in 100,000 but expressed my concern that for *younger* people, like those of us in our 20s and 30s, COVID infections may actually not be that dangerous. Why should I (as a young guy) get a shot that might be as dangerous as COVID?
> 
> Her response was an honest one: she agreed that COVID is less harmful to very young people, and said that "even if a vaccination is about as dangerous as COVID" that it's still better for everyone to get vaccinated, so that we protect the broader public (protect each other).
> 
> It was refreshing to get an honest answer like that, but that's still a VERY tough pitch to make to younger people.
> 
> They should take a medicine, when it's doubtful it offers them significant protection, mainly to protect baby boomers? Really?


I think that on balance, getting COVID is probably still significantly riskier than getting vaccinated, for young people. Few young people die, but there seems to be a decent rate of disability which is non-trivial. 'Brain fog', loss of smell, chronic fatigue, chronic pain. Considerably higher than the risk of blood clots.


----------



## andrewf

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Friend of mine who is 73 got the jab a week ago along with his wife and sister in law. He is fine, both women got sick and haven't got over it yet. Meanwhile I don't know anyone who has Covid or ever had it. I'm retired, live in the country, and go to the store once a week and practice social distancing wear a mask and take vitamin D. So no, will not be taking any vaccine any time soon.


Well, the dangerous phase for you will be when most people are vaccinated and you start letting your guard down and going out more. You may have the misfortune of coming into contact with a vaccinated but still infected person and catch it that way.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole

From what I have been able to find out getting vaccinated does NOT prevent you from getting infected does NOT prevent you from getting sick but MAY prevent you from dying. The chance of catching Covid is about 1 in 1000, if you get it the chance of dying is about 1 in 200 rising to 1 in 20 if you are old and sick to begin with.
On the other hand a significant number of people are getting sick and even dying from the vaccine.
So it looks like a toss up to me.


----------



## MrMatt

milhouse said:


> I'm guessing it's more like a month and a half as the provincial health website seems to be showing the 40-44 cohort as May/June.
> 
> I was going to grab an open slot next week at the pharmacy down the block and in the time it took for me to walk over to the kitchen and ask the missus if she had a preference what day she wanted to go, all the slots were gone.


May is less than 2 weeks away.


----------



## cainvest

Rusty O'Toole said:


> From what I have been able to find out getting vaccinated does NOT prevent you from getting infected does NOT prevent you from getting sick but MAY prevent you from dying. The chance of catching Covid is about 1 in 1000, if you get it the chance of dying is about 1 in 200 rising to 1 in 20 if you are old and sick to begin with.
> On the other hand a significant number of people are getting sick and even dying from the vaccine.
> So it looks like a toss up to me.


Interested in knowing where you got your info?


----------



## MrMatt

Rusty O'Toole said:


> From what I have been able to find out getting vaccinated does NOT prevent you from getting infected does NOT prevent you from getting sick but MAY prevent you from dying. The chance of catching Covid is about 1 in 1000, if you get it the chance of dying is about 1 in 200 rising to 1 in 20 if you are old and sick to begin with.
> On the other hand a significant number of people are getting sick and even dying from the vaccine.
> So it looks like a toss up to me.


I question these numbers. Since you didn't source them, and they don't match up with any of the publicly available data I'm aware of. (see my "polite" way of accusing someone of being full of #@!!)

If you chance of getting COVID is 1 in 1000, how did over a million people in Canada having gotten COVID? Did they all beat the odds?

The reason Ontario was freaking out was at 4k new cases a day, that's 30k new cases/wk, on a population of 15M, that's 1 in 500 people getting it in a week. Way above your estimate

Also the CFR in Canada is somewhere around 2% of those who got COVID.
We've had just under 24k COVID19 deaths, with our population of 37M, that's what, 1 in 1500?


----------



## Eder

Rusty O'Toole said:


> From what I have been able to find out getting vaccinated does NOT prevent you from getting infected does NOT prevent you from getting sick but MAY prevent you from dying. The chance of catching Covid is about 1 in 1000, if you get it the chance of dying is about 1 in 200 rising to 1 in 20 if you are old and sick to begin with.
> On the other hand a significant number of people are getting sick and even dying from the vaccine.
> So it looks like a toss up to me.


Well your chance of getting Covid after a full Pfizer vaccine is about 1/100 of 1% and zero chance of spreading it to your wife. Might be worth it even if Bill Gates can then tune in to your brain after.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole

I'm afraid my figures were badly out of date. Latest statistics, for Canada, 1,139, 043 covid cases and 23,713 deaths or about 1 person in 35 infected and 1 out of 48 infected people died. I apologize for the error. Source of statistics here COVID Live Update: 143,532,736 Cases and 3,056,856 Deaths from the Coronavirus - Worldometer
To put this in perspective cancer kills 83,000 per year and is the leading killer of Canadians.


----------



## Bananatron

Eder said:


> Well your chance of getting Covid after a full Pfizer vaccine is about 1/100 of 1% and zero chance of spreading it to your wife. Might be worth it even if Bill Gates can then tune in to your brain after.


Gates just has read only information at this time ie) location tracking. The update for read/write is coming with Covid 21, I mean 22.


----------



## hboy54

My wife and I got first AZ this week. I'll let you know if either of us dies.


----------



## MrMatt

Rusty O'Toole said:


> I'm afraid my figures were badly out of date. Latest statistics, for Canada, 1,139, 043 covid cases and 23,713 deaths or about 1 person in 35 infected and 1 out of 48 infected people died. I apologize for the error. Source of statistics here COVID Live Update: 143,532,736 Cases and 3,056,856 Deaths from the Coronavirus - Worldometer
> To put this in perspective cancer kills 83,000 per year and is the leading killer of Canadians.


Heck smoking kills 45 000, and nobody seems to care about that.


----------



## andrewf

MrMatt said:


> Heck smoking kills 45 000, and nobody seems to care about that.


I think people are more indifferent about smoking deaths as they seem like personal responsibility.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole

We may have over reacted to covid. It did not turn out near as bad as the so called experts predicted, and in the US the states that did not lock down or impose Draconian restrictions are doing better than those that did. In other words the most restrictive states, like New York, have worse outcomes than Florida and Texas.


----------



## MrMatt

Rusty O'Toole said:


> We may have over reacted to covid. It did not turn out near as bad as the so called experts predicted, and in the US the states that did not lock down or impose Draconian restrictions are doing better than those that did. In other words the most restrictive states, like New York, have worse outcomes than Florida and Texas.


New York is a massive urban center, they were destined for a mess. Also they spiked early and had uniquely horrible political leadership for a western country.

Florida and Texas are far more distributed.

It's interesting for me here in London, which while a reasonably large city, we haven't had nearly the level of problems that the GTA has had.

Just to point out that texas was more than twice as bad as canada as whole, and arguably at least 3x as bad as Ontario (adjusted for population)

Quick googling.
also Texas had 2.86M cases and 50k deaths. with a population of 30M
Canada 1.1M 24k deaths, and populaton 37.5M
Ontario 430k cases, 7800 deaths, population of 15M


I think there are a lot of factors at play here.


----------



## sags

Florida was a mess. The governor wouldn't lock down so the cities did it for him. The mayors were pleading with people and closed beaches.

A lot of snowbirds fled Florida and headed home......to New York and other northern cities and Canada.

London is not doing that well. The hospital's have moved resources from other floors into the ICU and COVID floors.

Non emergency health care is being delayed. Last week I had an appointment for a simple test moved from May 31st to August.........they hope.


----------



## sags

Covid deaths are in addition to all the other causes of death. That is why hospitals are getting overwhelmed and are delaying treatments and tests.


----------



## MrMatt

sags said:


> London is not doing that well. The hospital's have moved resources from other floors into the ICU and COVID floors.
> 
> Non emergency health care is being delayed. Last week I had an appointment for a simple test moved from May 31st to August.........they hope.


London case numbers are routinely below other large cities, and the reasons we're moving resources into our ICUs is that London is getting patient transfers from the hard hit areas.








Transport teams moving adult patients from hard hit areas to local hospitals


Health care workers on the ground and in the sky have been working around the clock to transfer the hardest hit COVID-19 patients to intensive care units (ICU) across Ontario.



london.ctvnews.ca





Several hospitals have been at capacity all month, that's why they're moving them out.
That's also why they're moving more providers to front line positions.

Of course non emergency health care is being delayed, the province issued that order weeks ago.
Your simple test can wait, you don't like it, move to the US where you can buy your way ahead of the person who's going to die.


----------



## sags

London hospitals set another new record for COVID patients today. The bus transit system LTC reports 7 employees are infected.

You really need to get better sources of information. The rising cases are clear in the graphs. We are at record highs right now.


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/londonontario/comments/mv8jpp


----------



## MrMatt

sags said:


> London hospitals set another new record for COVID patients today. The bus transit system LTC reports 7 employees are infected.
> 
> You really need to get better sources of information. The rising cases are clear in the graphs. We are at record highs right now.


None of your information contradicts my claims. But this seems to be a pattern with you, you argue against claims I never made. 

1. London cases are routinely lower than many other large cities.

My primary data source is. Perhaps you could share your "better" source that shows us doing worse than other major centers?





Datasets - Ontario Data Catalogue
 






covid-19.ontario.ca





Compare the different health units, London is doing much better than many large centers, like Toronto, Peel, or Hamilton.


2. London ICUs have patients transferred in from other regions. This is because those other regions are harder hit than london and filled up their ICU's weeks ago.


I


----------



## Bananatron

hboy54 said:


> My wife and I got first AZ this week. I'll let you know if either of us dies.


No reply means he's dead


----------



## cainvest

Quite the rush on AZ shots here this week. Many people I know have got it or will have in the next few days.


----------



## Bananatron

Sister in law works as a nurse. She was off on maternity leave and on return she applied and was hired for some sort of strictly day job. About 2 weeks ago she was called to work in the icu as they are short staffed and overworked. Last two patients she dealt with that passed from covid were a 55 year old moderately overweight woman and a healthy 34 year old man. I'm not sure if the man passed away or not but he's not in good shape. 

She signed her husband up for the AZ vaccine, not sure when he's getting it. My wife and I are currently thinking about it.


----------



## Eder

Bananatron said:


> She signed her husband up for the AZ vaccine, not sure when he's getting it. My wife and I are currently thinking about it.


In the words of Kevin Costner in Bull Durham..."Don't think, Meat!"


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Sister in law works as a nurse. She was off on maternity leave and on return she applied and was hired for some sort of strictly day job. About 2 weeks ago she was called to work in the icu as they are short staffed and overworked. Last two patients she dealt with that passed from covid were a 55 year old moderately overweight woman and a healthy 34 year old man. I'm not sure if the man passed away or not but he's not in good shape.
> 
> She signed her husband up for the AZ vaccine, not sure when he's getting it. My wife and I are currently thinking about it.


I signed up for the AZ vaccine, and waitlist if a slot becomes available sooner.

If your SIL is familiar with the situation in Ontario (maybe BC), they're going to start reducing care to patients due to shortages. (staff, drugs, beds)
Get the shot


----------



## Numbersman61

Since I live in Alberta and am over 75, I have now received my two doses of Pfizer. My children and their spouses are all in their forties. They have either received their first AZ dose or have an appointment to receive the vaccine within the next week.


----------



## Tostig

Good news. The fake news about Covid and vaccines and the overblown risk of the AstraZeneca vaccine have not affected GenX. The people in their 40s have embraced their turn to get the vaccine that some pharmacies have run out.


----------



## Covariance

james4beach said:


> I phoned into a call-in show, where a doctor / public health expert was answering questions about AZ and other shots.
> 
> I told them that I understand the severe AZ side effects are rare at 1 in 100,000 but expressed my concern that for *younger* people, like those of us in our 20s and 30s, COVID infections may actually not be that dangerous. Why should I (as a young guy) get a shot that might be as dangerous as COVID?
> 
> Her response was an honest one: she agreed that COVID is less harmful to very young people, and said that "even if a vaccination is about as dangerous as COVID" that it's still better for everyone to get vaccinated, so that we protect the broader public (protect each other).
> 
> It was refreshing to get an honest answer like that, but that's still a VERY tough pitch to make to younger people.
> 
> They should take a medicine, when it's doubtful it offers them significant protection, mainly to protect baby boomers? Really?


Agreed. This is off topic but it’s worth interjecting here as you raise it. Anecdotally I have asked a number of people who are late teens and early twenties about the vaccine. All of them want to get vaccinated as soon as possible. They expect to receive Pfixer/Moderna when available. They are more concerned about the lack of employment opportunities this summer.


----------



## MrMatt

Tostig said:


> Good news. The fake news about Covid and vaccines and the overblown risk of the AstraZeneca vaccine have not affected GenX. The people in their 40s have embraced their turn to get the vaccine that some pharmacies have run out.


Vaccine shortages have been the story this whole time.


----------



## Money172375

Got my AZ today. Two family members had fevers and chills for 24 hours. We’ll see how I do.


----------



## cainvest

Money172375 said:


> Got my AZ today. Two family members had fevers and chills for 24 hours. We’ll see how I do.


A few of my friends are reporting the same things (and headaches) after their AZ shot.


----------



## Numbersman61

My son got his AZ shot a few days ago. First night was bad - now fine. I have read that after second AZ shot, reaction is not as bad ax second shot of Pfizer. Two days after my second Pfizer shot, I was very sleepy but recovered after long nap.


----------



## MrMatt

100% headache vs 34% brain dieseas and 2% death.
I'm 25 hours away from my shot.








A third of Covid-19 survivors suffer 'brain disease,' study shows | CNN







www.cnn.com


----------



## Spudd

Getting my AZ this afternoon.


----------



## Money172375

5.5 hours in, no side effects. When do most people start to experience them?


----------



## cainvest

Money172375 said:


> 5.5 hours in, no side effects. When do most people start to experience them?


From my small sample, starts later that night or early the next day.


----------



## james4beach

Those of you getting AZ should keep an eye out for symptoms of blood clots. These symptoms can be easy to miss or dismiss if you don't know what to look for.

There have currently been 4 official cases of this thrombosis reported in Canada. Keep an eye out and be vigilant; it can be treated.


----------



## andrewf

MrMatt said:


> 100% headache vs 34% brain dieseas and 2% death.
> I'm 25 hours away from my shot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A third of Covid-19 survivors suffer 'brain disease,' study shows | CNN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


"It's just a 'bad flu'." (F these idiots)

Who cares about neurological disease?


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> Those of you getting AZ should keep an eye out for symptoms of blood clots. These symptoms can be easy to miss or dismiss if you don't know what to look for.
> 
> There have currently been 4 official cases of this thrombosis reported in Canada. Keep an eye out and be vigilant; it can be treated.


For those of you getting Pfizer or Moderna you should also keep an eye out for symptoms of blood cloths, since statistically they carry the same blood clot risk as the AZ vaccine. (I've posted the BMJ study several times)

Were those 4 cases with AZ or the other vaccines?


----------



## james4beach

MrMatt said:


> Were those 4 cases with AZ or the other vaccines?





https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/vaccine-blood-clot-hamilton-1.6000733



I'm not sure what exactly is being reported here. The article says "Canada has *four other official cases of VITT*, which is estimated to occur in one out of every 100,000 to 250,000 people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca-Oxford COVID-19 vaccine."

And this other article says "Right now in Canada, there are four official cases of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT),"


----------



## Money172375

Wow. Side effects hit hard and fast. Was fine all day....couldn’t even feel the injection site. Then around 10 hours after the shot.....bam! I’ve never had symptoms go from nothing to 120% so fast. I literally felt fine one second, then starting shaking with chills. mI or headache came on. That was ok. But the chills! Shaking, trembling, body aches, wsweating, hot, cold. Wow. 
then BAM.......gone just as quickly as it arrived. Ordeal lasted about 6 hours. I’ve read the 2nd AZ dose is easier then the first, opposite of PfMod. I hope that’s true. I can’t imagine it being much worse......thank god it was short lived.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/vaccine-blood-clot-hamilton-1.6000733
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what exactly is being reported here. The article says "Canada has *four other official cases of VITT*, which is estimated to occur in one out of every 100,000 to 250,000 people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca-Oxford COVID-19 vaccine."
> 
> And this other article says "Right now in Canada, there are four official cases of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT),"


It's important to note with all this that the odds with Moderna/Pfizer are similar to AZ.
I wonder why they don't mention this in the articles?

Really "news" reporting has gotten sensationalistic and poor quality, particular on science type topics.


----------



## cainvest

MrMatt said:


> It's important to note with all this that the odds with Moderna/Pfizer are similar to AZ.
> I wonder why they don't mention this in the articles?


But are the odds the same?

So far in Canada pfizer has 6.4M people with one shot while AZ is only 613,000 yet AZ is already being linked to the current blood clot events. 

One must also remember that blood clots are not the only serious adverse effect seen. And to keep things in perspective the overall chances of serious effects from vaccines are very small, 0.006% of all doses administered.


----------



## MrMatt

cainvest said:


> But are the odds the same?


Pretty much
Based on the previously quoted BMJ paper its 5 per million with AZ, and 4.1 per million with Moderna/Pfizer.

It is important to note that the confidence intervals are very wide on both.

Without getting into the complexities Confidence intervals are basically the range of what the "real" value is.
So 4 with a 90% confidence of 2-8, means the data shows 4, but the we're 90% sure that the actual value is somewhere between 2 and 8.


----------



## cainvest

MrMatt said:


> Pretty much
> Based on the previously quoted BMJ paper its 5 per million with AZ, and 4.1 per million with Moderna/Pfizer.


Just seems some of the real world feedback doesn't support that BMJ paper.


----------



## MrMatt

cainvest said:


> Just seems some of the real world feedback doesn't support that BMJ paper.


Ok, care to cite the contradictory data?

Also just got my COVID19 AZ shot, less than an hour ago.


----------



## Money172375

MrMatt said:


> Ok, care to cite the contradictory data?
> 
> Also just got my COVID19 AZ shot, less than an hour ago.


Hang on. In 10-12 hours, you might feel it. Get ready with hot water bottle or electric blanket. Everyone I know had extreme chills for a few hours about 10-12 hours later.


----------



## MrMatt

Money172375 said:


> Hang on. In 10-12 hours, you might feel it. Get ready with hot water bottle or electric blanket. Everyone I know had extreme chills for a few hours about 10-12 hours later.


Oh, I'm ready for that, and needles freak me out.
But I think it makes sense, and like I said earlier, if the only impact is that I don't get sick enough to take up a hospital bed, that's worth it. 

Though the pharmacist did an excellent job. Barely noticed.


----------



## james4beach

Word on the street here in BC (at least in my circles) is that the AZ shots have been depleted

No question there has been powerful demand though, which is great.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> Word on the street here in BC (at least in my circles) is that the AZ shots have been depleted
> 
> No question there has been powerful demand though, which is great.


Yeah, they'll run out soon, but again, it looks like so far we're not constrained by interest or ability to vaccinate quickly.

Unfortuantely our Indian supply needs to be shut off, but we should be able to easily get lots of AZ from the US.


----------



## sags

The AZ symptoms may just be a sign the vaccine is working.........so good news there.

Just watch out for unusual types of symptoms like chest pain or blood clots forming (bruising). Seek 911 assistance immediately in those circumstances.


----------



## james4beach

sags said:


> Just watch out for unusual types of symptoms like chest pain or blood clots forming (bruising). Seek 911 assistance immediately in those circumstances.


Other serious symptoms to watch for after getting AZ are

shortness of breath
leg swelling
severe or persistent headache
blurred vision
unusual skin bruising
pin-point spots beyond the injection site

These can be indications of potentially severe or life threatening blood clots, and you should seek medical help immediately. Unfortunately you may face push-back from doctors (who might not want to see you) but you will have to fight a bit, and be forceful to point out that these are side effects after AZ.

Myself, I'm avoiding AZ because I don't have confidence that I will be seen in case I have severe side effects. I don't have a doctor.


----------



## cainvest

james4beach said:


> Myself, I'm avoiding AZ because I don't have confidence that I will be seen in case I have severe side effects. I don't have a doctor.


It's your call but you do realize those are extremely rare. It doesn't matter if you have a family doctor, with those symptoms you're heading to the ER.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> Myself, I'm avoiding AZ because I don't have confidence that I will be seen in case I have severe side effects. I don't have a doctor.


FYI, don't think that, the emergency rooms are very well staffed.
People are in and out in record times.

Source, neighbourhood kids parents report getting through emergency very very fast.

If you think you have serious side effects, get seen, the sooner they're caught, the more likely they are to be treated.

Serious side effects with any of the vaccines are exceedingly rare, serious impacts of Covid are shockingly common.


----------



## Eder

I haven't had a family doctor my entire life. I'm sure you'll somehow pull thru.

My #2 Son in Law had the AZ 2 days ago no symptoms, not even a sore arm...and he's a bit of a complainer.


----------



## james4beach

MrMatt said:


> FYI, don't think that, the emergency rooms are very well staffed.
> People are in and out in record times.
> 
> Source, neighbourhood kids parents report getting through emergency very very fast.


Interesting, thanks that is good to know. I didn't realize ER is still working pretty normally.

You're talking about Ontario, right?


----------



## milhouse

There's also a couple of Urgent and Primary Care Centres that have opened up in downtown Vancouver, east Vancouver, and North Vancouver. I don't think they've been very well publicized. They seem to serve as a middle ground between family doctors and an ER. Kind of a walk-in clinic with a bit of an ER feel to it, though they don't operate 24x7. We sometimes walk by the east Vancouver one during our walks in the evening and the time we poked our heads in, it didn't seem busy at all. We did see an ambulance drop someone off once though but that's likely the exception.


----------



## Retired Peasant

MrMatt said:


> FYI, don't think that, the emergency rooms are very well staffed.
> People are in and out in record times.


YMMV. Money told us last week about their neighbour being sent home with antibiotics (burst appendix), only after insisting on seeing a doctor and collapsing.
Coronavirus (COVID-19)


----------



## hboy54

Money172375 said:


> 5.5 hours in, no side effects. When do most people start to experience them?


My wife felt off about 24-48 hours after. I had chills about 2AM 15 hours after, but woke up feeling back to normal with just a bit of sore arm if I pushed on it for 3 or 4 days after.


----------



## Money172375

I’m pretty much back to normal 48 hours later. Still feeling a little warm


----------



## cainvest

Money172375 said:


> I’m pretty much back to normal 48 hours later. Still feeling a little warm


One of my friends took 2 days to recover as well.


----------



## Eclectic12

Money172375 said:


> Wow. Side effects hit hard and fast. Was fine all day....couldn’t even feel the injection site. Then around 10 hours after the shot.....bam! I’ve never had symptoms go from nothing to 120% so fast. I literally felt fine one second, then starting shaking with chills. mI or headache came on. That was ok. But the chills! Shaking, trembling, body aches, wsweating, hot, cold. Wow.
> then BAM.......gone just as quickly as it arrived. Ordeal lasted about 6 hours ..


Interesting ... was pretty similar to the H1N1 vaccine for me.

Raising the injection arm above shoulder level resulted in twinge. About eight hours later a headache. Mild chills at 11pm, stronger chills at 3am (the 3am being the new part). Chills done in the morning with the headache reducing until gone three days later.

*Edit:*
Chills needed a blanket and that was it (i.e. no hot water bottle, electric blanket).

Cheers


----------



## MrMatt

I had a fever for about 20 hours, and still have a bit of headache and joint stiffness.
It's actually comparable to a moderate cold, if today was a work day, I'd take it off.


----------



## Spudd

I got the shot at 5pm Friday. Saturday morning felt OK but around lunch time was hit by a fever that lasted until bed time. Today (Sunday) feeling much better, had a mild headache this morning but fever was gone and since lunch time I've basically been feeling fine. Overall out of commission for about a day. 

I looked up the stats and it said 2/3 of people getting the AZ get a fever.


----------



## MrMatt

Spudd said:


> I got the shot at 5pm Friday. Saturday morning felt OK but around lunch time was hit by a fever that lasted until bed time. Today (Sunday) feeling much better, had a mild headache this morning but fever was gone and since lunch time I've basically been feeling fine. Overall out of commission for about a day.
> 
> I looked up the stats and it said 2/3 of people getting the AZ get a fever.


Mine broke, I still feel a bit off, not a pleasant day. But better than COVID.


----------



## Money172375

Did anyone get a confirmed 2nd appointment for Az? I suspect the provincial portal serving up PfMod tracks these things, but I suspect one could “game” AZ and get a 2nd shot quite easily within 4 weeks at a different pharmacy.

ps. Family doctor told my parents he thinks the Pf receipients will get their 2nd shot much sooner than 4 months based on extra supply, anti-vaxxers and others who got the first shot but choose to skip the 2nd.


----------



## james4beach

MrMatt said:


> Mine broke, I still feel a bit off, not a pleasant day. But better than COVID.


Sorry to hear about that. I have friends who got Moderna in the US and they had a pretty rough time as well, fever, and one of them was even bed-ridden.

And think ... if the body has this kind of reaction to just 1 or 2 proteins of the virus, imagine how it would have reacted to the _damned live virus_ with all its 29 proteins. Plus, that damned thing would be _replicating_ in the body.


----------



## OptsyEagle

james4beach said:


> Sorry to hear about that. I have friends who got Moderna in the US and they had a pretty rough time as well, fever, and one of them was even bed-ridden.
> 
> And think ... if the body has this kind of reaction to just 1 or 2 proteins of the virus, imagine how it would have reacted to the _damned live virus_ with all its 29 proteins. Plus, that damned thing would be _replicating_ in the body.


Virtually everyone is going to get the opportunity to find out. If you live on the planet earth your body will eventually get exposed to the covid-19 virus. You will not be able to prevent it. So the only choice a person living on this planet has is to either:

1) expose their body to covid-19 safely through vaccination
or
2) expose their body to covid-19 dangerously through natural infection.

There are no other choices. I know people may think they have another choice, but they do not.


----------



## james4beach

OptsyEagle said:


> Virtually everyone is going to get the opportunity to find out. If you live on the planet earth your body will eventually get exposed to the covid-19 virus. You will not be able to prevent it. So the only choice a person living on this planet has is to either:
> 
> 1) expose their body to covid-19 safely through vaccination
> or
> 2) expose their body to covid-19 dangerously through natural infection.
> 
> There are no other choices.


This is a GREAT framing of this and should be out there. There have been a quarter billion COVID infections in the world so far, so if you add in unreported/asymptomatic there have probably been at least half a billion COVID infections so far.

Every human will eventually be exposed.


----------



## cainvest

OptsyEagle said:


> Virtually everyone is going to get the opportunity to find out. If you live on the planet earth your body will eventually get exposed to the covid-19 virus. You will not be able to prevent it. So the only choice a person living on this planet has is to either:
> 
> 1) expose their body to covid-19 safely through vaccination
> or
> 2) expose their body to covid-19 dangerously through natural infection.
> 
> There are no other choices. I know people may think they have another choice, but they do not.


Not sure I agree, I bet some will never catch covid once vaccines are wide spread enough, good chance it'll just die off.

Being picky but I'd change #1 to
1) expose their body safely to a vaccine so it'll be prepared to fight off covid-19.


----------



## fireseeker

Money172375 said:


> Did anyone get a confirmed 2nd appointment for Az? I suspect the provincial portal serving up PfMod tracks these things, but I suspect one could “game” AZ and get a 2nd shot quite easily within 4 weeks at a different pharmacy.


Even if you could do this, you probably don't want to.



> The Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is effective at preventing people from developing COVID-19 and could reduce viral transmission, according to a new scientific paper from the team behind the vaccine.
> The paper also suggests that delaying the second dose to 12 weeks after the first works especially well. The protective effect of the first dose doesn't appear to wane during these 12 weeks, and leaving a longer gap between doses ultimately seems to make the second more protective.


Delaying The Second AstraZeneca Dose Actually Increases Protection, New Data Suggests


----------



## Bananatron

OptsyEagle said:


> Virtually everyone is going to get the opportunity to find out. If you live on the planet earth your body will eventually get exposed to the covid-19 virus. You will not be able to prevent it. So the only choice a person living on this planet has is to either:
> 
> 1) expose their body to covid-19 safely through vaccination
> or
> 2) expose their body to covid-19 dangerously through natural infection.
> 
> There are no other choices. I know people may think they have another choice, but they do not.


That's what I tell my coworker buddies that don't want to take this "experimental" vaccine.

There isn't a choice to stay back in 2019. You're either going to make the decision to take your chances with the vaccine, or with the virus. For whatever reason they're ok with getting the virus, the one that has a 2% chance of putting a gen xer in the hospital, the one that makes you lose your sense of taste and smell, the one that could do permanent brain and lung damage.

I have another buddy who says he wants to get it only so he can travel and go to oiler games. I told him that's a stupid reason to put something in your body. Get it because you want the protection or don't get it at all. I think he's just trying to save face with the skeptics at work. 

Wife and I are booked for Friday. These stories of feeling malaise and fever make me extra excited...


----------



## andrewf

Sounds like timing the vaccine it to be unwell during the weekend is a good idea (if you care about missing work).


----------



## cainvest

andrewf said:


> Sounds like timing the vaccine it to be unwell during the weekend is a good idea (if you care about missing work).


Check, schedule shot for Monday!


----------



## s1231

more information.
---








Which COVID-19 Vaccines are Adenovirus-Based?


See a full list of COVID-19 vaccines in use today and in development that are adenovirus-based.




heavy.com




*Here Are the COVID-19 Vaccines that Use Adenovirus Vectors*
Updated Apr 13, 2021 
Both Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine and the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine use adenovirus vectors. Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine utilizes an Ad26 vector (a human adenovirus) believed to have less natural immunity in the population, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia reported.

The AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine (called Covishield in India) uses a chimpanzee-based vector called ChAdOx1. This same vector was used in a 2018 trial on 24 people for a MERS vaccine, CEN reported.

Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine uses Ad26 for its first dose, followed by Ad5 for its second dose, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia reported.

China’s CanSino Biologics also has an adenovirus vector vaccine for COVID-19, CEN reported. This uses the Ad5 vector, which has in the past brought up questions about effectiveness since many humans have some pre-existing immunity to that particular adenovirus strain.









Adenovirus-vectored Covid-19 vaccines’ efficacy during a potential revaccination campaign likely to be stifled by antivector response


Adenovirus-vectored vaccines for Covid-19 are at a disadvantage if vaccination campaigns become periodic to combat new SARS-CoV-2 variants.




www.clinicaltrialsarena.com




12 Feb 2021
Of the adenovirus-vectored vaccine frontrunners, the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca’s AZD1222 may have an advantage in the first round of vaccinations compared to Johnson & Johnson’s JNJ-78436735, CanSino Biologics’ Convidicea (AD5-nCoV) and Russia’s Sputnik V, as AZD1222 is the only vaccine that uses a nonhuman vector. Nonetheless, all these vaccines are still likely to trigger antivector responses, which is likely to dilute their efficacy during revaccinations, experts noted.


----------



## Spudd

Money172375 said:


> Did anyone get a confirmed 2nd appointment for Az? I suspect the provincial portal serving up PfMod tracks these things, but I suspect one could “game” AZ and get a 2nd shot quite easily within 4 weeks at a different pharmacy.


I got mine at Walmart and they booked my 2nd shot while I was there. It will be 12 weeks later (mid-July).


----------



## MrMatt

cainvest said:


> Check, schedule shot for Monday!


It's Tuesday, any reaction?


----------



## Money172375

We wife seems to be having a tougher time than me. She’s 28 hours in, with a headache, fever, body aches.


----------



## doctrine

A second dead Canadian from AZ vaccine.



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/az-vaccine-death-quebec-1.6003957



It's not at all clear to me that the risk for young women especially dying from AZ is greater than the risk from dying from COVID, which you might never catch and even if you did, are not in a high risk group. Would this person really not been better off waiting for a Pfizer or Moderna shot?


----------



## andrewf

doctrine said:


> A second dead Canadian from AZ vaccine.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/az-vaccine-death-quebec-1.6003957
> 
> 
> 
> It's not at all clear to me that the risk for young women especially dying from AZ is greater than the risk from dying from COVID, which you might never catch and even if you did, are not in a high risk group. Would this person really not been better off waiting for a Pfizer or Moderna shot?


I thought the conclusion was that the risks from Pfizer/Moderna was similar. Pfizer apparently has had some cases of enlarged heart. 

Here is a 31 y/o Olympian who was very seriously ill (was preparing a makeshift will with his parents). I think COVID is still far riskier for young people than the vaccine.


----------



## james4beach

doctrine said:


> A second dead Canadian from AZ vaccine.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/az-vaccine-death-quebec-1.6003957
> 
> 
> 
> It's not at all clear to me that the risk for young women especially dying from AZ is greater than the risk from dying from COVID, which you might never catch and even if you did, are not in a high risk group. Would this person really not been better off waiting for a Pfizer or Moderna shot?


Really sad to hear about these AZ deaths.

I've had the same concern from the start, and analyzed some stats myself. Yes COVID is dangerous, but it's hardly ever fatal for very young people. I gave the example of someone in their 20s, and I believe that someone in their 20s should not get AZ. I don't think someone in their 30s should get it either.

But at age 50 or something? That gets difficult because COVID really starts to become extremely dangerous.

Personally I think we should be taking the cautious approach like Norway and Germany.


----------



## andrewf

james, watch the video I linked above.


----------



## james4beach

andrewf said:


> james, watch the video I linked above.


Do you mean that one anecdote? Yes, it's a rough case, but one has to look at broad statistics.

There just are not too many deaths of people in their 20s. There aren't even that many hospital admissions of people in their 20s. So in groups like that where serious cases appear to be very rare, it's a legitimate question whether a vaccine (which can have a frequently fatal side effect at 1 in 100,000) is worth it.


----------



## Money172375

james4beach said:


> Do you mean that one anecdote? Yes, it's a rough case, but one has to look at broad statistics.
> 
> There just are not too many deaths of people in their 20s. There aren't even that many hospital admissions of people in their 20s. So in groups like that where serious cases appear to be very rare, it's a legitimate question whether a vaccine (which can have a frequently fatal side effect at 1 in 100,000) is worth it.


Is dying from a clot 1 in 100,000? Or is getting a clot 1 in 100,000? I don’t know the stat. But Most clots are easily treated.


----------



## Money172375

my cousin’s wife died from a flu a few years back. Can’t remember how old she was. Around 40…maybe younger. Walked herself to the hospital…never came out.

when it’s your time, it’s your time.


----------



## cainvest

MrMatt said:


> It's Tuesday, any reaction?


Sorry, the next Monday!


----------



## Eder

According to a top doc in the Covid business thrombosis is the major serious symptom of Covid. Better to get a shot imo.


----------



## andrewf

james4beach said:


> Do you mean that one anecdote? Yes, it's a rough case, but one has to look at broad statistics.
> 
> There just are not too many deaths of people in their 20s. There aren't even that many hospital admissions of people in their 20s. So in groups like that where serious cases appear to be very rare, it's a legitimate question whether a vaccine (which can have a frequently fatal side effect at 1 in 100,000) is worth it.


Yes, it's an anecdote. Anecdotes are sufficient to disprove "young, healthy people have nothing to worry about". Given that severe vaccine side effects are extremely rare, rarer than severe COVID illness among young, healthy people. IMO it is dead wrong to say someone in their 30s is better off not getting vaccinated and taking their chances with COVID.









COVID-19 hospitalization rate by age group U.S. September 2020 | Statista


As of September 26, the hospitalization rate in the United States due to COVID-19 was highest for those aged 85 years and older.




www.statista.com





People in their 20s are hospitalized at 800/1M population for COVID-19 up to Sept 2020 in the US (so far, the risk only increases until eventually everyone is exposed to COVID), and in 30s 1200/1M. Compare to 4/1M risk of blood clots. And nearly everyone will get COVID eventually if they are unvaccinated. 200x-300x higher risk of getting hospitalized with COVID eventually vs chance of developing a blood clot from the vaccine.


----------



## Synergy

james4beach said:


> Really sad to hear about these AZ deaths.
> 
> I've had the same concern from the start, and analyzed some stats myself. Yes COVID is dangerous, but it's hardly ever fatal for very young people. I gave the example of someone in their 20s, and I believe that someone in their 20s should not get AZ. I don't think someone in their 30s should get it either.
> 
> But at age 50 or something? That gets difficult because COVID really starts to become extremely dangerous.
> 
> Personally I think we should be taking the cautious approach like Norway and Germany.


One must also factor in the odds of contracting COVID in the first place. Do you live in a hotspot, married with six kids, work at an amazon fulfillment center, have pre-existing medical conditions, etc. Or, are you single, young, work from home, live in a rural area, in great health, have groceries delivered to your front door, etc. I like NACI's stance on AZ. No harm in waiting for potentially safer / more effective alternatives, for some. Others may need to take what they can get ASAP. Informed consent, risk vs benefits, etc. Good luck finding someone able and willing to provide you with true informed consent - that's too much work, requires a lot of questioning, etc.

Yes, young healthy people will die. Yes, some smokers will live a long healthy life free of cancer, etc. You can't focus on individual cases. Everyone needs to be properly informed, weight the pros / cons and make a decision for themselves....

Looks like Pfizer is working on some form of anti-viral medication. This is good news


----------



## andrewf

Synergy said:


> One must also factor in the odds of contracting COVID in the first place.


I think this is relevant for vaccine shopping. Is it better/safer to wait for a slightly better vaccine? But if the question is to get vaccinated at all, I would assume that almost every person living will be exposed and have the opportunity to become infected over time (next 5 years, say).


----------



## Synergy

andrewf said:


> I think this is relevant for vaccine shopping. Is it better/safer to wait for a slightly better vaccine? But if the question is to get vaccinated at all, I would assume that almost every person living will be exposed and have the opportunity to become infected over time (next 5 years, say).


If there where no alternatives this thread would not likely exist. Based on the information we have so far, less will suffer, die, etc. if the masses get vaccinated. Unfortunately, alternatives complicate the informed consent and decision making process. Whether everyone is vaccinated or not, most people will likely become exposed to some form of COVID-19 at some point in the near future. It would be nice to have some form of treatment to help keep individuals out of the hospitals, from getting severely ill, etc.


----------



## james4beach

Synergy said:


> One must also factor in the odds of contracting COVID in the first place. Do you live in a hotspot, married with six kids, work at an amazon fulfillment center, have pre-existing medical conditions,


I agree, one's individual circumstances are a huge factor.

Some friends and I (we're all in our 30s) had a group chat going tonight. Some of us have very extroverted partners, which expose us to more risk. Some have children (who bring the virus home). Lots of individual circumstances when considering risk. People working in any store and dealing with the public absolutely have to get vaccinated ASAP.

Or someone who has roommates, who lives with several others needs to get AZ or anything they can get ASAP.

Myself, I will *not* be rushing to get AZ, and I think that people in my age group with higher risk situations (working in stores, having children, big families) really should get those doses. In any case, I am registered for vaccination and waiting my turn.


----------



## MrMatt

Synergy said:


> Looks like Pfizer is working on some form of anti-viral medication. This is good news


They already have treatments, they just dont' have an administration plan.


----------



## OptsyEagle

Synergy said:


> If there where no alternatives this thread would not likely exist. Based on the information we have so far, less will suffer, die, etc. if the masses get vaccinated.


If the masses get vaccinated, less unvaccinated people will suffer and die perhaps on a monthly basis, but they ALL will eventually have to understand that the odds of them never eventually getting covid is very, very, low. The odds are very much against them.

Even if herd immunity is achieved, and I doubt it will be, it can only happen AFTER the majority of these unvaccinated people get infected. That will be a requirement.

As I have said many times, there are only two choices available to each member of our planet earth:

1) Expose their bodies to covid safely through vaccination
or
2) Expose their bodies to covid dangerously through natural infection.


----------



## doctrine

andrewf said:


> Yes, it's an anecdote. Anecdotes are sufficient to disprove "young, healthy people have nothing to worry about". Given that severe vaccine side effects are extremely rare, rarer than severe COVID illness among young, healthy people. IMO it is dead wrong to say someone in their 30s is better off not getting vaccinated and taking their chances with COVID.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> COVID-19 hospitalization rate by age group U.S. September 2020 | Statista
> 
> 
> As of September 26, the hospitalization rate in the United States due to COVID-19 was highest for those aged 85 years and older.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.statista.com


This is not the only alternative. It's not "take AZ or get COVID eventually". You can wait for Pfizer or Moderna. So the risk is the delta risk of waiting an additional number of weeks or perhaps months. Both Pfizer and Moderna are producing quantities measured in billion(s), not million(s), of doses.


----------



## cainvest

doctrine said:


> Both Pfizer and Moderna are producing quantities measured in billion(s), not million(s), of doses.


Moderna has supply issues to Canada but Pfizer has been very good. Also the J&J vaccine should be available shortly though I don't know their delivery numbers.


----------



## MrMatt

doctrine said:


> This is not the only alternative. It's not "take AZ or get COVID eventually". You can wait for Pfizer or Moderna. So the risk is the delta risk of waiting an additional number of weeks or perhaps months. Both Pfizer and Moderna are producing quantities measured in billion(s), not million(s), of doses.


Well yeah, but why wait a few weeks or months for no significant change in risk?


----------



## OptsyEagle

Also, one can kind of see the way this is all going. Originally the Pfizer was in the best supply and it was focused on the very older ages. It flew off the shelf. As the demand slowed they lowered the age until they came to age 60 and then they stopped. Astrazeneca came on board and too many older people gave it a thumbs down and in hopes of not letting it expire they lowered the age to 55, for that vaccine only. As the thumbs started to turn down on AZ from that age group they then lowered it to age 40.

Now with any new Pfizer/Moderna vaccine deliveries, they seem to want to skip the lower age groups, found below age 60, in favour of people who are targeted as more needy. Here we see it going to hotspot area codes, at all ages, pregnant women (including the fathers???), etc., etc. etc. The list seems to be long and ever increasing. Plus, all those people dosed with Pfizer/Moderna in the past, that only received their first shot of vaccine, are going to be soon due for their 2nd shot. Those appointments will also have to go ahead of you. So whatever time you have waited for your Pfizer vaccination so far, you can now almost double.

One can see from a mile away that the very few doses of JNJ will go to select people as well. People who they can be fairly certain, getting a 2nd dose will be problematic. Our homeless people, etc.

My point is that if you are under age 60, not in those hotspots or included in the ever increasing subgroup of vulnerable people, Astrazeneca will be your only option for quite a while. I can't say how long but it is not going to be anytime soon, as the politics plays out for the ever increasing group of whiners being put ahead of you.

Just something to consider, as well.


----------



## MrMatt

OptsyEagle said:


> Also, one can kind of see the way this is going. Originally the Pfizer was in the best supply and it was focused on the very older ages. It flew off the shelf. As the demand slowed they lowered the age until they came to age 60 and then they stopped. Astrazeneca came on board and too many older people gave it a thumbs down and in hopes of not letting it expire they lowered the age to 55, for that vaccine only. As the thumbs started to turn down on AZ from that age group they then lowered it to age 40.
> 
> Now with any new Pfizer/Moderna vaccines they seem to want to skip the lower age groups found below age 60, in favour of people who are targeted as more needy. Here we see it going to hotspot area codes, at all ages, pregnant women (including the fathers???), etc., etc. etc. The list seems to be long and ever increasing.
> 
> One can see from a mile away that the very few doses of JNJ will go to select people as well. People who they can be fairly certain, getting a 2nd dose will be problematic. Our homeless people, etc.
> 
> My point is that if you are under age 60, not in those hotspots or included in the ever increasing subgroup of vulnerable people, Astrazeneca will be your only option for a while. I can't say how long but it could be quite a while, as the politics plays out for the ever increasing group of whiners being put ahead of you.
> 
> Just something to consider, as well.


Honestly the homeless should get JNJ, just from a pandemic management strategy.
They're one of the most at risk groups.

Also from my pure self interest, I don't want the homeless populations generating variants. That would be bad for me as well.
One thing that most people misunderstand is that helping people can be to your personal benefit.

Conversely, hurting people is rarely to your own personal benefit.


----------



## james4beach

doctrine said:


> Both Pfizer and Moderna are producing quantities measured in billion(s), not million(s), of doses.


There are enormous amounts of MRNA vaccines coming in the next few months. The last info I heard was, for Pfizer, 2 million doses/week in May and 2.5 million doses/week in June. For Pfizer alone, that's 18 million doses in the next 60 days or so.

However, I still think that anyone over perhaps age 50 and anyone at high risk like store workers, parents, people with roommates, should get the AZ shot immediately.

I don't see any logical reason for a 50 or 60 year old to avoid the AZ shot.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> I don't see any logical reason for a 50 or 60 year old to avoid the AZ shot.


I don't see any logical reason for anyone to avoid the AZ shot.


----------



## cainvest

MrMatt said:


> I don't see any logical reason for anyone to avoid the AZ shot.


Unless you have a known allergic reaction to one of it's ingredients or are under 18.

Given a choice I'd still opt for Pfizer just on the basis of their excellent supply.


----------



## OptsyEagle

cainvest said:


> Given a choice I'd still opt for Pfizer just on the basis of their excellent supply.


But we are not given a choice. There is a cost to waiting for that ever elusive choice. The price of that wait will depend on how long it is but I have illustrated above that for certain groups described, it could be quite a while.


----------



## cainvest

OptsyEagle said:


> But we are not given a choice. There is a cost to waiting for that ever elusive choice. The price of that wait will depend on how long it is but I have illustrated above that for certain groups described, it could be quite a while.


I had a choice and it cost for me a 5 day wait. For those younger people it could indeed be a while before mRNA becomes available to them. Also for those in heavy "lockdown areas" the risk might be greatly reduced anyways.


----------



## OptsyEagle

cainvest said:


> I had a choice and it cost for me a 5 day wait. For those younger people it could indeed be a while before mRNA becomes available to them. Also for those in heavy "lockdown areas" the risk might be greatly reduced anyways.


I am only following Ontario. If you are older then 60 then go for the Pfizer. If you are not and you are not on the long list of prioritized people. A list that keeps getting longer and longer every day, then you will be waiting a very long time for Pfizer, especially since we are going to have to start 2nd dosing those people who have already got it very soon.


----------



## cainvest

OptsyEagle said:


> I am only following Ontario. If you are older then 60 then go for the Pfizer.


In MB we've had pfizer scheduling 50+ for a bit now and they'll probably start getting those shots next week.


----------



## Money172375

OptsyEagle said:


> I am only following Ontario. If you are older then 60 then go for the Pfizer. If you are not and you are not on the long list of prioritized people. A list that keeps getting longer and longer every day, then you will be waiting a very long time for Pfizer, especially since we are going to have to start 2nd dosing those people who have already got it very soon.


the 2nd does of Pfizer probably won’t start til late June. The 4 month guidance was made March 3. 

and NACI thinks most people will only wait 2 month. There is a lot of Pfizer coming in.
theres 20 million doses coming in from now until end of June.


----------



## OptsyEagle

Money172375 said:


> the 2nd does of Pfizer probably won’t start til late June. The 4 month guidance was made March 3.
> 
> and NACI thinks most people will only wait 2 month. There is a lot of Pfizer coming in.
> theres 20 million doses coming in from now until end of June.


That would make it closer to the beginning of June because the people who were scheduled for their shots in early March (Injected with 1st shot in February) would have had their appointments cancelled, so as to give that shot to another person as a 1st dose. Plus, if you want to give your vaccinators a little grace time, you would want those 2nd shots scheduled at least a week earlier to ensure you can actually hit that 4 month deadline. So we are now possibly talking about the end of May.

I can't comment on the Pfizer deliveries, but everyday I learn about a new group of people or postal codes or factories, that are being prioritized ahead of 59 year olds or younger, in Ontario. Will the new deliveries outpace the newcomers, that the government keeps pushing ahead in line, I cannot say.

In my opinion, a person should either take the 1st dose of vaccine available or plan to wait until mid summer. If they get a shot earlier then that, then great, but certainly do not plan on it.


----------



## OptsyEagle

Money172375 said:


> the 2nd does of Pfizer probably won’t start til late June. The 4 month guidance was made March 3.
> 
> and NACI thinks most people will only wait 2 month. There is a lot of Pfizer coming in.
> theres 20 million doses coming in from now until end of June.


I stand corrected.

*Ontario *has reduced the age for vaccination through clinics to age 55, as of now. They plan to drop the age to register for your vaccination appointment:

Age 55 and older - today
Age 50 and older - May 3rd
Age 40 and older May 10th
Age 18 and older May 24th

Looks like they are trying to jab everyone once before they need to start the 2nd dose vaccinations. If they pull this off, my hat is off to these people. Well done.

Edit: They are offerring Pfizer or Moderna in the above appointments.


----------



## Money172375

OptsyEagle said:


> I stand corrected.
> 
> *Ontario *has reduced the age for vaccination through clinics to age 55, as of now. They plan to drop the age to register for your vaccination appointment:
> 
> Age 55 and older - today
> Age 50 and older - May 3rd
> Age 40 and older May 10th
> Age 18 and older May 24th
> 
> Looks like they are trying to jab everyone once before they need to start the 2nd dose vaccinations. If they pull this off, my hat is off to these people. Well done.


Quebec is attempting to have everyone with a first shot in the next two weeks. They’re dropping ages in 5 year increments every 2 days.


----------



## OptsyEagle

Nice to see them going back to age. The debate between fighting the source of infections (hotspots) and fighting the risk of hospitalizations and death (age and specific groups) was one that I could not really get my head around to determine which would give the biggest bang for the vaccine buck. I kind of decided that the vaccine was best directed at age and other vulnerabilities, starting in hot spots but finishing everywhere else, before they drop the age limit, even for the hot spots. I do not think we have enough vaccine or people coming forward to put out the fire in the hotspots, so lets protect the others.

Other experts and posters here looked at it differently and I cannot really say they were wrong. All I know is with the new variants, age 59 is still a fairly vulnerable person and they seem to have simply bypassed them, except for the Astrazeneca offering...which seemed to be a little wanky through pharmacies. Some had good luck and most others seem to be on a waiting list that I don't know if anyone is even looking at.

Anyway, nice to see some advancement here.


----------



## andrewf

OptsyEagle said:


> Nice to see them going back to age. The debate between fighting the source of infections (hotspots) and fighting the risk of hospitalizations and death (age and specific groups) was one that I could not really get my head around to determine which would give the biggest bang for the vaccine buck. I kind of decided that the vaccine was best directed at age and other vulnerabilities, starting in hot spots but finishing everywhere else, before they drop the age limit, even for the hot spots. I do not think we have enough vaccine or people coming forward to put out the fire in the hotspots, so lets protect the others.
> 
> Other experts and posters here looked at it differently and I cannot really say they were wrong. All I know is with the new variants, age 59 is still a fairly vulnerable person and they seem to have simply bypassed them, except for the Astrazeneca offering...which seemed to be a little wanky through pharmacies. Some had good luck and most others seem to be on a waiting list that I don't know if anyone is even looking at.
> 
> Anyway, nice to see some advancement here.


They are still doing hotspots. It is 18+ in Toronto, Peel, etc. if you can get an appointment (I can't). The idea of targeting hotspots is to slow the rate of community spread. Yes, an 18 year old may not be at much personal risk from an infection, but they can infect 5 others in a multigenerational household. Not to mention that there are many essential workplaces in Peel and Toronto that the rest of the province relies on. Most of Amazon's GTA operations, many food producers and distributors in that area. We could shut all those down to manage the spread, as well.


----------



## Money172375

This is the reason Peel has struggled with covid.


----------



## latebuyer

I haven't read the whole thread as i worried it was fear mongering about astra zeneca. Frankly with women's birth control having a 1 in 10000 risk of blood clots i wasn't that worried about blood clot risk. For me i work at a university and supposedly we are going back face to face in september so i wanted my second shot before then. I didn't have a lot of faith in age based roll out. When i read about them already having booster shots for pfizer planned i regret it. I did read astrazenica has 70% coverage against british variant which is good for BC. Anyways whats done is done.


----------



## Bananatron

Well we went through with the AZ shots today. Very minor side effects, if any (could be all in our heads).

If I die, I'll let you know.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Well we went through with the AZ shots today. Very minor side effects, if any (could be all in our heads).
> 
> If I die, I'll let you know.


Wait 24-48 hours. Most people I know who got fevers were in that timeframe.
Don't worry, seems to come on and leave pretty quick.


----------



## latebuyer

My sister was sick for 7 days! Myself and the 3 people i know who got it only had a sore arm.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> Wait 24-48 hours. Most people I know who got fevers were in that timeframe.
> Don't worry, seems to come on and leave pretty quick.


It's been about 48 hours, I'd say side effects registered about a 1/10, if they were existent at all. Arm was a bit sore, maybe I felt a bit warm yesterday, seasonal allergies have been bothering me more.

With our province hitting 2x the amount of cases per capita as Ontario I'm glad I got it out of the way when it was my turn. Anecdotally, about 75% of the people my age (early 40s) are either waiting for the pfizer or trying to get an available spot (for pfizer or moderna), or simply not getting vaccinated at this time at all.


----------



## james4beach

52 year old Edmonton woman died from the AstraZeneca shot. Their daughter previously lost her dad, and the teen now has no parents.

The woman was also turned away from ER. This is exactly what I wrote about why I feared getting the AZ shot, because I'm not confident that I will get medical care if I suspect I have a blood clot. The side effect isn't a big deal if you are able to seek medical treatment. But COVID is resulting in hospitals not functioning properly.

And that's what happened to this woman, and she's dead as a result.

How many deaths is this now, in Canada? And what is it as a % of AZ shots given?


----------



## james4beach

Important message ... if you got the AZ shot, carefully monitor for blood clot symptoms.

If you need treatment, go to a hospital or doctor, and BE PUSHY. Don't let them turn you away. Refuse to leave ... maybe bring a friend and do not leave until you are seen.


----------



## cainvest

james4beach said:


> How many deaths is this now, in Canada? And what is it as a % of AZ shots given?


That's one in 253,000 in Alberta ... about what they we saying the chances are.


----------



## james4beach

cainvest said:


> That's one in 253,000 in Alberta ... about what they we saying the chances are.


Yeah I also wonder if the Canada-wide number is showing the expected rate.

My concern is that the side effect is serious and needs medical attention, but hospitals tend to not want to see people because of the COVID overloads in patients. It can be hard to get medical attention these days. It happened to a friend of mine in a foreign country as well, he had a serious infection but the hospitals refused to see him.

Similar things are happening in Canada too, for example this woman who was refused. It's so sad that she would probably be alive today if she had received medical care ... and she tried!


----------



## Eder

She actually did receive care, just not at the Grey Nuns Hospital. 

My father in law croaked in the emergency room in Kelowna from a brain aneurysm waiting in line after being triaged as not important. 

Mistakes are made every day by triage nurses...no one is perfect.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> Yeah I also wonder if the Canada-wide number is showing the expected rate.
> 
> My concern is that the side effect is serious and needs medical attention, but hospitals tend to not want to see people because of the COVID overloads in patients. It can be hard to get medical attention these days. It happened to a friend of mine in a foreign country as well, he had a serious infection but the hospitals refused to see him.
> 
> Similar things are happening in Canada too, for example this woman who was refused. It's so sad that she would probably be alive today if she had received medical care ... and she tried!


I've actually heard from people that they are finding ER visits much faster for injuries.
It could be people avoiding the hospital, or fewer sports injuries.


----------



## Bananatron

james4beach said:


> 52 year old Edmonton woman died from the AstraZeneca shot. Their daughter previously lost her dad, and the teen now has no parents.
> 
> The woman was also turned away from ER. This is exactly what I wrote about why I feared getting the AZ shot, because I'm not confident that I will get medical care if I suspect I have a blood clot. The side effect isn't a big deal if you are able to seek medical treatment. But COVID is resulting in hospitals not functioning properly.
> 
> And that's what happened to this woman, and she's dead as a result.
> 
> How many deaths is this now, in Canada? And what is it as a % of AZ shots given?


I think its 3 deaths in Canada for something like 2,000,000++ doses administered.


----------



## gibor365

So, I ended getting Pfizer and practically didn't have any side effects, same with my son..... but my wife got AZ (even though I tried to convince her to wait for Pfizer), so she had fever for 3 days, very sore muscles and felt exhausted ..


Now, there is another issues with AZ
What the Hell is going on?! Should people who got 1st AZ dose to get now 1 or more Pfizer or Moderna (if yes, how?) or wait for 2nd AZ dose sometime in the future?! "Minister of Health" PattyHajdu answered on this MP question that she and her family got AZ ... who cares what this Minister had!!! What should do people tricked by a government?!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1389655880405159936


----------



## Spudd

I don't think anyone's been "tricked by a government" here in Canada regarding vaccines. I do think it was stupid how Patty Hajdu didn't answer the question. If she doesn't know if they'll be allowing mixing of vaccines she should just say so instead of talking about something totally different. That's the thing I hate most with politicians. 

Anyway, I believe her that they will do what the science says is correct. I already have my appointment for my second dose of AZ and since the US has not approved AZ, I'm optimistic that we will be able to receive enough doses to give everyone the second dose who got AZ for the first dose. But if we can't, at least the first dose has given us some immunity in the meantime, and we will get for our second dose whatever the science says is the best. Whether that is a second dose of AZ, a second dose of Pfizer, or two doses of Pfizer remains to be seen. 

There is currently a study taking place in the UK on mixing vaccines and the effectiveness. It started in February and plans to run for a year. I don't know when the first results will be released. Presumably we will wait for results from that before willy-nilly mixing vaccines.


----------



## cainvest

Spudd said:


> Whether that is a second dose of AZ, a second dose of Pfizer, or two doses of Pfizer remains to be seen.


I've been watching the deliveries of vaccines here in MB. From Apr 23 - May 6 we received,
160 doses of AZ
111,000 doses of pfizer



Spudd said:


> There is currently a study taking place in the UK on mixing vaccines and the effectiveness. It started in February and plans to run for a year. I don't know when the first results will be released. Presumably we will wait for results from that before willy-nilly mixing vaccines.


Will be interesting to see those results. In theory, any vaccine that triggers an immune response should work as a second shot booster but they'll likely have no numbers to back up efficacy in the short term.


----------



## andrewf

I'd have been willing to get AZ, but I was never (and still am not) eligible to get it. I am most likely getting Pfizer at my mass vaccination appointment (May 20).


----------



## gibor365

Spudd said:


> I do think it was stupid how Patty Hajdu didn't answer the question. If she doesn't know if they'll be allowing mixing of vaccines she should just say so instead of talking about something totally different. That's the thing I hate most with politicians.


100%!


----------



## MrMatt

Spudd said:


> There is currently a study taking place in the UK on mixing vaccines and the effectiveness. It started in February and plans to run for a year. I don't know when the first results will be released. Presumably we will wait for results from that before willy-nilly mixing vaccines.


They're not "mixing vaccines", they are taking 2 different vaccines.
Really I think of the second shot as a booster.

First shot gets you very protected, second shot (the booster) gets you more protected.

There are suggestions that a third booster will be required to address variants anyway, and many are thinking that we'll need annual shots anyway.

I think people are getting too much into the weeds (ie details) on this.

Vaccination is just stimulating an immune response so that if you're exposed to the actual virus, your reaction is better.

It's important that in some cases (tetanus) giving the vaccine after exposure can have a positive impact.


----------



## latebuyer

Sorry I don't have the article handy but there is a global news article that says the risk is much lower for the second shot for blood clots. My sister is freaking me out telling me you can get a blood clot between 4 and 24 days.

However just to add in bc they have a ton of these hot spot clinics so who knows when I would have got my shot. Luckily I'm not in a hot spot area.


----------



## MrMatt

latebuyer said:


> Sorry I don't have the article handy but there is a global news article that says the risk is much lower for the second shot for blood clots. My sister is freaking me out telling me you can get a blood clot between 4 and 24 days.
> 
> However just to add in bc they have a ton of these hot spot clinics so who knows when I would have got my shot. Luckily I'm not in a hot spot area.


The risk of an AZ blood clot is a distraction, it is insignificant at the individual level.
I got my AZ shot without any hesitation, and would do so again.


----------



## Bananatron

9


MrMatt said:


> The risk of an AZ blood clot is a distraction, it is insignificant at the individual level.
> I got my AZ shot without any hesitation, and would do so again.


On reddit there are some stories about some rare but unpleasant side effects of the pfizer vaccine, especially with women. 









r/CovidVaccinated


r/CovidVaccinated: Vaccines are here! Many types, from many manufacturers, at different times, for different people and in different places. Lets …




www.reddit.com


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> 9
> 
> On reddit there are some stories about some rare but unpleasant side effects of the pfizer vaccine, especially with women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> r/CovidVaccinated
> 
> 
> r/CovidVaccinated: Vaccines are here! Many types, from many manufacturers, at different times, for different people and in different places. Lets …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reddit.com


Any medical intervention has a risk of side effects.
At the millions vaccinated it's pretty clear that the side effects are rare and typically quite minor.


----------



## Money172375

Ontario likely to mix first and second COVID-19 vaccine doses amid lack of AstraZeneca supply: Elliott


Ontario Health Minister Christine Elliott says it’s likely that recipients of the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine may receive a different shot for their second dose




www.theglobeandmail.com


----------



## james4beach

Money172375 said:


> Ontario likely to mix first and second COVID-19 vaccine doses amid lack of AstraZeneca supply: Elliott
> 
> 
> Ontario Health Minister Christine Elliott says it’s likely that recipients of the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine may receive a different shot for their second dose
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theglobeandmail.com


We're already out of AZ? Did we already use all of America's AZ shots?


----------



## cainvest

james4beach said:


> We're already out of AZ? Did we already use all of America's AZ shots?


Since April 23rd MB has only received 160 doses of AZ. Haven't seen any news on when more is coming in.


----------



## andrewf

james4beach said:


> We're already out of AZ? Did we already use all of America's AZ shots?


I think the doses were borrowed mostly came from the US stock that was nearing expiry. Since then I believe AZ has been having production problems and India stopped export (probably rightly so).


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> I think the doses were borrowed mostly came from the US stock that was nearing expiry. Since then I believe AZ has been having production problems and India stopped export (probably rightly so).


This was one of my concerns regarding AZ


----------



## Bananatron

I feel a bit deceived taking AZ last Friday (April 30). People my age who wanted to wait and get the mrna because of blood clots/efficacy/ whatever are eligible and getting pfizer starting today. Now we have supply issues and likely can't get our second AZ shots so we all become lab rats mixing vaccine cocktails.


----------



## gibor365

Bananatron said:


> I feel a bit deceived taking AZ last Friday (April 30). People my age who wanted to wait and get the mrna because of blood clots/efficacy/ whatever are eligible and getting pfizer starting today. Now we have supply issues and likely can't get our second AZ shots so we all become lab rats mixing vaccine cocktails.


Exactly same situation is with my wife....she should've just wait another week.... now, not enough we already "lab rats" by delaying 2nd dose, some are also "rat labs" by mixing vaccines! [email protected]!


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> I feel a bit deceived taking AZ last Friday (April 30). People my age who wanted to wait and get the mrna because of blood clots/efficacy/ whatever are eligible and getting pfizer starting today. Now we have supply issues and likely can't get our second AZ shots so we all become lab rats mixing vaccine cocktails.


What is your fear about mixing vaccines?

Get your AZ shot, then go get 1 or two shots of whatever vaccine is next, and keep taking boosters until COVID19 is done. Might even have to take it annually like the flu shot.
FYI, many vaccine shots (MMR, Flu etc) contain several vaccines in the bottle.


----------



## Beaver101

^ Not to worry, all your favourite (and not-so-favourite) politicians got AZ so they'll be setting the best examples for Canadian cocktail vaccines. Works better than vodka!


----------



## Dilbert

Since having the AZ, I’ve been keeping my blood thin with the help of Laphroaig 10 year single malt….seems to work just fine!


----------



## Beaver101

^ Home-made blood thinner, eh? Don't over-do it though.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> What is your fear about mixing vaccines?
> 
> Get your AZ shot, then go get 1 or two shots of whatever vaccine is next, and keep taking boosters until COVID19 is done. Might even have to take it annually like the flu shot.
> FYI, many vaccine shots (MMR, Flu etc) contain several vaccines in the bottle.


No fear. It feels like there was an effort to simply get the governments money worth out of expiring AZ vaccines that other countries didn't want or need. If I would have known that in 10 days time every eligible person would have had access to the mrna vaccines I would have never taken the risk of blood clots with the AZ vaccine.

It feels like my sense of civic duty was used against me. They didn't want this stuff in SA, didn't need it in America, but it's good enough for Canada's 40-54 year olds.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> No fear. It feels like there was an effort to simply get the governments money worth out of expiring AZ vaccines that other countries didn't want or need. If I would have known that in 10 days time every eligible person would have had access to the mrna vaccines I would have never taken the risk of blood clots with the AZ vaccine.
> 
> It feels like my sense of civic duty was used against me.


If you are so scared of the risk of blood clots with AZ, wouldn't you be similarly concerned about the risk of blood clots with the mRNA vaccines, since it is pretty much the same (albeit very low) risk?








Covid-19: Risk of cerebral blood clots from disease is 10 times that from vaccination, study finds


Covid-19 is associated with a far greater risk of cerebral venous thrombosis than the vaccinations that protect against it, early research from the University of Oxford has shown. The results, available as a non-peer reviewed preprint,1 show that the risk of cerebral venous thrombosis “is...




www.bmj.com





If you have another study showing a lower prevalence of mRNA vaccine related blood clots,I'd love to see it.

What about inflamation?
"Additionally, the committee said it’s aware of cases of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, as well as pericarditis, inflammation of the membrane around the heart, following vaccination with Pfizer’s shot, known as Comirnaty. "








Pfizer, AstraZeneca COVID vaccines probed in Europe after reports of heart inflammation, rare nerve disorder


Europe’s drug regulator says it’s evaluating an assortment of potential side effects following inoculation with leading COVID-19 vaccines, including heart inflammation, facial swelling and a rare n | The European Medicines Agency’s safety committee said on Friday that it's evaluating an...




www.fiercepharma.com






There are risks with all of them, as far as I know the risks of the vaccines are all incredibly low. To the point of being insignificant, and this is all fearmongering for the mathematically illiterate.


----------



## gibor365

btw, do you really believe that Trudeau, Ford and other ministers got AZ?! Or maybe it was just for media, cameras?!


----------



## MrMatt

gibor365 said:


> btw, do you really believe that Trudeau, Ford and other ministers got AZ?! Or maybe it was just for media, cameras?!


I believe they likely got the shot they claimed to.
Really, why wouldn't they? There isn't much reason to choose the alternates IMO.


----------



## Bananatron

gibor365 said:


> btw, do you really believe that Trudeau, Ford and other ministers got AZ?! Or maybe it was just for media, cameras?!


I believe they did, yes.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> If you are so scared of the risk of blood clots with AZ, wouldn't you be similarly concerned about the risk of blood clots with the mRNA vaccines, since it is pretty much the same (albeit very low) risk?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Covid-19: Risk of cerebral blood clots from disease is 10 times that from vaccination, study finds
> 
> 
> Covid-19 is associated with a far greater risk of cerebral venous thrombosis than the vaccinations that protect against it, early research from the University of Oxford has shown. The results, available as a non-peer reviewed preprint,1 show that the risk of cerebral venous thrombosis “is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bmj.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you have another study showing a lower prevalence of mRNA vaccine related blood clots,I'd love to see it.
> 
> What about inflamation?
> "Additionally, the committee said it’s aware of cases of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, as well as pericarditis, inflammation of the membrane around the heart, following vaccination with Pfizer’s shot, known as Comirnaty. "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pfizer, AstraZeneca COVID vaccines probed in Europe after reports of heart inflammation, rare nerve disorder
> 
> 
> Europe’s drug regulator says it’s evaluating an assortment of potential side effects following inoculation with leading COVID-19 vaccines, including heart inflammation, facial swelling and a rare n | The European Medicines Agency’s safety committee said on Friday that it's evaluating an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fiercepharma.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are risks with all of them, as far as I know the risks of the vaccines are all incredibly low. To the point of being insignificant, and this is all fearmongering for the mathematically illiterate.


Well the good news is we get to be exposed to the risks of AZ and Pfizer now. 

We have some long term studies on the risks of mixing these particular vaccines, yeah?


----------



## gibor365

MrMatt said:


> I believe they likely got the shot they claimed to.
> Really, why wouldn't they? There isn't much reason to choose the alternates IMO.


Maybe ..... before I read about them getting AZ (and timing was a bit fishy), I assumed that all of them already got fully vaccination with Pfizer....


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Well the good news is we get to be exposed to the risks of AZ and Pfizer now.
> 
> We have some long term studies on the risks of mixing these particular vaccines, yeah?


We're not mixing them.
Also if you want long term studies, go ahead and wait for them... BTW they might take a long time.


----------



## andrewf

I think they have been saying that heavy drinking is not a good idea after the vaccine as it may reduce its effectiveness?


----------



## MrMatt

andrewf said:


> I think they have been saying that heavy drinking is not a good idea after the vaccine as it may reduce its effectiveness?


I read one that says drinking isn't' a problem.

But heavy drinking isn't a good idea in general.. so who knows.

Myself I had a killer headache afterwards, and I didn't take anything for it, because painkillers might lessen the response.


----------



## gibor365

MrMatt said:


> I read one that says drinking isn't' a problem.
> 
> But heavy drinking isn't a good idea in general.. so who knows.
> 
> Myself I had a killer headache afterwards, and I didn't take anything for it, because painkillers might lessen the response.


I also read that drinking isn't a problem. :"Heavy drinking" is very subjective . I know guy who becomes drunk just from the smell of alcohol


----------



## andrewf

gibor365 said:


> btw, do you really believe that Trudeau, Ford and other ministers got AZ?! Or maybe it was just for media, cameras?!


Maybe in Russia would government officials lie about what vaccine they are getting in a photo op...


----------



## gibor365

andrewf said:


> Maybe in Russia would government officials lie about what vaccine they are getting in a photo op...


Maybe in Russia too, but more likely i Canada


----------



## like_to_retire

Don't worry that thousands were guinea pigs in the ill advised experiment.

_"Ontario will no longer give AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine as 1st dose due to blood clot risk."_

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-update-astrazeneca-vaccine-1.6022545

ltr


----------



## sags

Doug Ford needs to resign immediately.


----------



## Bananatron

like_to_retire said:


> Don't worry that thousands were guinea pigs in the ill advised experiment.
> 
> _"Ontario will no longer give AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine as 1st dose due to blood clot risk."_
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-update-astrazeneca-vaccine-1.6022545
> 
> ltr


@MrMatt 

You need to tell them it's just fear mongering and they are numerically Illiterate.


----------



## Eder

like_to_retire said:


> Don't worry that thousands were guinea pigs in the ill advised experiment.
> 
> _"Ontario will no longer give AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine as 1st dose due to blood clot risk."_
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-update-astrazeneca-vaccine-1.6022545
> 
> ltr


Alberta canned the AZ yesterday.


----------



## sags

Jason Kenney needs to resign immedately.


----------



## gibor365

sags said:


> Doug Ford needs to resign immediately.


Trudeau needs to resign immediately together with his liberal ministers


----------



## gibor365

like_to_retire said:


> Don't worry that thousands were guinea pigs in the ill advised experiment.
> 
> _"Ontario will no longer give AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine as 1st dose due to blood clot risk."_
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-update-astrazeneca-vaccine-1.6022545
> 
> ltr


Happened exactly what I was telling for months!


----------



## gibor365

gibor365 said:


> I posted some time ago question here , if I get AZ 1st shot, can I get 2nd shot from other pahrma....and I was told
> NO... and who knows... looking at our Health experts who changes opinions every 2nd day.... what are the chances that before time comes for 2nd AZ shot, it can be baned All together, esp. when 1.5M AZ sent from US get expired?


That's what I posted 1 month ago! ... and I was right!


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> @MrMatt
> 
> You need to tell them it's just fear mongering and they are numerically Illiterate.


Okay, they're fear mongering and numerically illiterate.

The rate is pretty much the same as they found months ago, and IMO it's not a problem.

But hey I was also against the extended interval on vaccines, maybe I'll be wrong again.

Honestly 3 deaths out of almost 2 million doses, that's high for vaccines, but it's low for pretty much any other medical intervention.


----------



## hboy54

I'd be perfectly happy to get my second AZ dose if it meant getting a second dose a month sooner. To whatever amount that the pandemic is prolonged by this decision, there will be more death and destruction by that delay than the AZ issues. People don't understand risks and benefits, so here we are LOL.


----------



## sags

I don't think mixing doses will be an acceptable solution for the public. That horse has left the barn.

They need to start vaccinating both first and second doses to get both counts rising.

I have no confidence in Doug Ford, so whatever is the wrong answer is the one he likely will pursue.


----------



## MrMatt

hboy54 said:


> I'd be perfectly happy to get my second AZ dose if it meant getting a second dose a month sooner. To whatever amount that the pandemic is prolonged by this decision, there will be more death and destruction by that delay than the AZ issues. People don't understand risks and benefits, so here we are LOL.


We have people dying every day, what's a handful of vaccine deaths? 
Sorry the greater good argument is strong here, the AZ vaccine should remain available.

that being said, I think that we should allow people the free choice if they want to take it or not.


----------



## MrMatt

sags said:


> I don't think mixing doses will be an acceptable solution for the public. That horse has left the barn.


I agree, but maybe rather than listening to the public, we should listen to the experts.



> They need to start vaccinating both first and second doses to get both counts rising.


Yes, now if only Trudeau could source the vaccine. (not his fault, but it is his job)



> I have no confidence in Doug Ford, so whatever is the wrong answer is the one he likely will pursue.


What wrong answer?
Vaccinate as many people as we have vaccine for? That's the "wrong strategy"?

Sorry, you're letting your hate for Ford blind you from the good job he's doing in such a tough situation.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> I agree, but maybe rather than listening to the public, we should listen to the experts.


Who made the decision to halt the use of AZ in Ontario, if not the experts?

This is all very confusing. They were experts when they said it was safe, but now that the risk is too high, they are no longer experts?

And your comment on vaccine deaths being acceptable, why? We have a supply of vaccines that are not tied to deaths, why don't we just use those instead of AZ?


----------



## andrewf

MrMatt said:


> We have people dying every day, what's a handful of vaccine deaths?
> Sorry the greater good argument is strong here, the AZ vaccine should remain available.
> 
> that being said, I think that we should allow people the free choice if they want to take it or not.


I think they are effectively deciding to use AZ only for completing second doses.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Who made the decision to halt the use of AZ in Ontario, if not the experts?


Yes, medical and political experts.



> This is all very confusing. They were experts when they said it was safe, but now that the risk is too high, they are no longer experts?


Info keeps change, and the trade offs are different.



> And your comment on vaccine deaths being acceptable, why?


Because I think it is riskier to be unvaccinated than not.



> We have a supply of vaccines that are not tied to deaths, why don't we just use those instead of AZ?


1. We don't have a supply of vaccines that are not tied to deaths or potentially harmful side effects. No such vaccine exists that I'm aware of.

2. Because we don't have it. 

I'd love to have a vaccine with no risks and no side effects, available in quantities so everyone could get it today.
But that's not the reality.
All vaccines have risks and side effects and we don't even have enough for everyone to get one today anyway.
Considering that, I'll take the extremely low risk vaccine that's available now, instead of waiting for a perfect vaccine that will likely never exist, or even a slightly lower risk vaccine that might be available in a few months.


----------



## damian13ster

But that is your opinion. Experts don't seem to agree.
Experts in multiple countries are saying that for population under 50 you have higher risk with vaccine than with COVID. Multiple countries came out (Denmark, Norway, USA not approving AZ at all being prime examples). 
Then there are experts like the ones in Canadian government that first say it is harmful for old people, then say it is only safe for old people than not young, then say it is safe for everyone, to 2 weeks later saying it isn't safe for anyone and they won't give it out.
I have no opinion on the subject. Just find it extremely irritating that science somehow changes with provincial and international borders.


----------



## MrMatt

damian13ster said:


> But that is your opinion. Experts don't seem to agree.
> Experts in multiple countries are saying that for population under 50 you have higher risk with vaccine than with COVID. Multiple countries came out (Denmark, Norway, USA not approving AZ at all being prime examples).
> Then there are experts like the ones in Canadian government that first say it is harmful for old people, then say it is only safe for old people than not young, then say it is safe for everyone, to 2 weeks later saying it isn't safe for anyone and they won't give it out.
> I have no opinion on the subject. Just find it extremely irritating that science somehow changes with provincial and international borders.


Please name a single country that said that for under 50 you are higher risk with a vaccine than with COVID19.

I think the AZ pile on is just political cover to divert all AZ to India where they desperately need it.

This is just like the Gov of Canada saying quarantines, travel bans and masks aren't effective.
They've lied before for political gain, they'll lie again.


When you say experts, do you mean immunologists? public health experts, or politicians, they're different groups.


----------



## damian13ster

Calculations have been performed based on Norwegian data where the risk of dying from COVID-19 disease among the different age groups is compared with the risk of dying from the severe, but rare, condition with severe blood clots observed after AstraZeneca vaccination.
"Since there are few people who die from COVID-19 in Norway, the risk of dying after vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine would be higher than the risk of dying from the disease, particularly for younger people," says Bukholm (Director of the Division of Infection Control and Environmental Health at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health.).


Source:





Norwegian Institute of Public Health's recommendation about AstraZeneca vaccine


The Norwegian Institute of Public Health has recommended stopping further use of the AstraZeneca vaccine (Vaxzevria) in the Coronavirus Immunisation Programme in Norway.



www.fhi.no




.



Denmark:








AstraZeneca vaccine: Denmark stops rollout completely


It is the first European country to fully withdraw the jab over possible links to rare blood clots.



www.bbc.com


----------



## MrMatt

damian13ster said:


> Calculations have been performed based on Norwegian data where the risk of dying from COVID-19 disease among the different age groups is compared with the risk of dying from the severe, but rare, condition with severe blood clots observed after AstraZeneca vaccination.
> "Since there are few people who die from COVID-19 in Norway, the risk of dying after vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine would be higher than the risk of dying from the disease, particularly for younger people," says Bukholm (Director of the Division of Infection Control and Environmental Health at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health.).
> 
> 
> Source:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Norwegian Institute of Public Health's recommendation about AstraZeneca vaccine
> 
> 
> The Norwegian Institute of Public Health has recommended stopping further use of the AstraZeneca vaccine (Vaxzevria) in the Coronavirus Immunisation Programme in Norway.
> 
> 
> 
> www.fhi.no
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> Denmark:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AstraZeneca vaccine: Denmark stops rollout completely
> 
> 
> It is the first European country to fully withdraw the jab over possible links to rare blood clots.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


Yes I see that, and with such low deathrate, maybe it makes sense in Norway.
But in other places like India, the risks are different.

I think Ontario is in the middle, obviously, it isn't 100% clear the right answer, myself I think the vaccine makes sense, and being aware of the risks, I took it.


----------



## damian13ster

Well, here is where you pose a question: do your individual actions have effect on your risk of getting infected.
If so, then you can decrease the risk of infection with a virus that has very small chance of killing you, rather then make decision to take the vaccine that has even smaller chance of killing you.

The entire equation is like this:
y * x < z
Where
x is a chance of dying from COVID at your age, health, and obesity
z is a chance of dying from the vaccine
y is a probability of getting infected, which depends on many factors, both individual and geographical

Here is an article on AZ risks:








VTE Risk Higher After Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 Vaccine, Study Affirms


Whether the benefit-risk balance is favorable depends on many factors, but it will be so “in very many cases,” the researcher says.




www.tctmd.com





"There were 59 VTE events observed versus 30 expected, for a standardized morbidity ratio (SMR) of 1.97 (95% CI 1.50-2.54). Cerebral venous thrombosis, which has been a focus of recent investigations around the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Janssen vaccines, was about 20 times more frequent than expected in the vaccinated cohort (SMR 20.25). The absolute risk was low, however, with 2.5 excess events per 100,000 vaccinations. In addition, there were significant increases in pulmonary embolism (3.4 excess events per 100,000) and “other” venous thrombosis (2.2 excess events per 100,000). "


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> I think the AZ pile on is just political cover to divert all AZ to India where they desperately need it.


Oh yeah, political cover. Sure. Couldn't possibly be that the experts are basically flying by the seat of their pants. Just like the meme that the whole no mask thing was just a clever smoke screen to make sure that no one took them from the health care workers. 


As if hospitals are supplied by Amazon and online retailers. 
As if the government had no options to seize them and prioritize health care workers, but had to rely on tricking the population and hoping they wouldn't buy them (this didn't work, BTW)
As if a population that hoarded 2 years worth of toilet paper would be dissuaded by someone telling them they didn't need masks. They also didn't need 2 years worth of toilet paper.
The experts told us we didn't need to wear masks *because they didn't think we needed to wear masks.
The experts are halting the use of AZ because they feel it is too risky compared to the alternatives.*

We would all be a lot better off if we stopped saying asinine things like "trust the experts". Better advice is: we currently have the best scientific information available, but this may change in the future. Make an informed decision based on this information. Experts have been wrong, or as you like to put it - information changes - so the word "trust" has no place in this discussion.

I too took the the AZ vaccine based on the opinions of experts. 

Now, the experts have changed their opinions, and it looks like we took a risk that they now deem to be too high. You don't see why I find that irritating? What about that healthy 52 year old lady that died in Alberta? Do you think her family is pleased with the waffling of the experts?


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> The experts told us we didn't need to wear masks *because they didn't think we needed to wear masks.*


Sorry, that's simply not believable.
we knew in December that it was a Coronavirus that causes serious respiratory issues.
Nobody in their right mind thought masks were unnecessary.
There is a reason it's considered rude not to cover your mouth if you have a cold.

They were simply lying. As even sags (the biggest Trudeau partisan here) said, people don't trust the government. They've continuously lied and misled.



> *The experts are halting the use of AZ because they feel it is too risky compared to the alternatives.*


Medically risky, or politically risky?
Compared to the case rate today, or the case rate a month ago.





> Experts have been wrong, or as you like to put it - information changes - so the word "trust" has no place in this discussion.


BS, we have to trust that the information they give us is the best they have, and that they did their due diligence in obtaining and analyzing it.
We have to trust they're doing their job.



> I too took the the AZ vaccine based on the opinions of experts.


So did I.



> Now, the experts have changed their opinions, and it looks like we took a risk that they now deem to be too high. You don't see why I find that irritating? What about that healthy 52 year old lady that died in Alberta? Do you think her family is pleased with the waffling of the experts?


I don't think they'll be pleased with anything, but the reality is that people will die with or without the vaccine.
I think that a month ago, the calculation was clearly in the take the vaccine side.
Look at India and Norway, in Norway maybe it doesn't make sense, but in India it most certainly does.


----------



## damian13ster

You can't blindly trust they give you best information they have.
Like you said. Them saying masks are unnecessary and don't help was a lie. Wouldn't it be right to question their 'advice' at that point rather than blindly trust them?
Governments need to be questioned permanently, otherwise you have a dictatorship (which Canada tried to introduce during pandemic (until 2022) by the way in first 'rescue' bill).


----------



## cainvest

Bananatron said:


> Now, the experts have changed their opinions, and it looks like we took a risk that they now deem to be too high. You don't see why I find that irritating?


Sad to say but it's an evolving situation and things will change, even for experts. A clinical trial of 40,000 may not reveal things that vaccinating 2,000,000 will.


----------



## andrewf

damian13ster said:


> Well, here is where you pose a question: do your individual actions have effect on your risk of getting infected.
> If so, then you can decrease the risk of infection with a virus that has very small chance of killing you, rather then make decision to take the vaccine that has even smaller chance of killing you.
> 
> The entire equation is like this:
> y * x < z
> Where
> x is a chance of dying from COVID at your age, health, and obesity
> z is a chance of dying from the vaccine
> y is a probability of getting infected, which depends on many factors, both individual and geographical
> 
> Here is an article on AZ risks:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VTE Risk Higher After Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 Vaccine, Study Affirms
> 
> 
> Whether the benefit-risk balance is favorable depends on many factors, but it will be so “in very many cases,” the researcher says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tctmd.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "There were 59 VTE events observed versus 30 expected, for a standardized morbidity ratio (SMR) of 1.97 (95% CI 1.50-2.54). Cerebral venous thrombosis, which has been a focus of recent investigations around the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Janssen vaccines, was about 20 times more frequent than expected in the vaccinated cohort (SMR 20.25). The absolute risk was low, however, with 2.5 excess events per 100,000 vaccinations. In addition, there were significant increases in pulmonary embolism (3.4 excess events per 100,000) and “other” venous thrombosis (2.2 excess events per 100,000). "


Your probably of getting infected _eventually_ is pretty darned high. I would say nearly guaranteed, especially once society largely reopens and there is high levels of exposure in public.


----------



## Bananatron

I don't believe Tam et al were lying to preserve masks. Their reasoning at the time, was sound. 









COVID-19: To mask or not to mask?


With infection cases now rising rapidly in the U.S.,there is more debate about whether people should wear face masks to limit the spread of the infection. Currently, Canada's chief public health officer, Dr. Teresa Tam, maintains the position that face masks can reduce the spread of the coronaviru




www.rcinet.ca







> Currently, Canada’s chief public health officer, Dr. Teresa Tam, maintains the position that face masks can reduce the spread of the coronavirus when worn by someone infected, they provide little protection to healthy people who wear them.......
> 
> 
> ......In a press conference on Monday she added they may in fact provide a false sense of security to healthy people who may also be touching their faces more often when wearing them through putting them on, taking them off, and making adjustments while wearing them.




Where this story about preserving masks came about and how many people latched on to it is quite fascinating. 

If there was an issue where the general public was taking masks at the expense of health care workers the government could have intervened in a more effective manner than sending their chief health officer out to lie about them (in a very convincing manner). Trudeau could have seized all medical grade masks and redirected them to hospitals, and guided the general public to use homemade masks or similar in the meantime. That is, if they believed masks worked. They didn't at the time. Neither did the who.

They told us to not wear masks, because that is what they believed at the time.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> They told us to not wear masks, because that is what they believed at the time.


Right... because a respiratory illness likely isn't spread by aerosol.

If they truly honestly believed that, you're delusional.
They were either lying, or so grossly misinformed it is astonishing. 

Maybe Tam should have gotten in touch with some sort of expert at the WHO, maybe they could have told her about this new disease.




__





Pneumonia of unknown cause – China







www.who.int




They even linked to a document on how to deal with this 








Infection prevention and control of epidemic-and pandemic prone acute respiratory infections in health care


Publicaciones de la Organización Mundial de la Salud




www.who.int





I can understand lying to preserve medical supplies, I think it is wrong, but I can understand it.

Either they lied, or they're so grossly incompetent they should be in prison.
I really really dislike Trudeau, but even I don't think his government is that incompetent.


----------



## OptsyEagle

I have learned in life that there appears to be a difference between lying and having ones opinion severely tainted by bias. Our leaders were so biased towards the idea that masks were of no protection to citizens they lost their common sense.

When I was fighting this mask debate, early in the pandemic, I kept telling people to listen to what they are actually saying "a mask provides no protection to the healthy wearer so you should donate your mask to the healthcare industry so that they can protect the health of doctors and nurses"? I cannot tell you how many Canadians I talked to, on these boards and in my own circle, that actually bought that load of garbage. I mean how can they protect healthcare workers and not the average citizen?

You need to listen to what they say and then use your own common sense to determine the safest approach for you and your family. You cannot outsource this to politicians or unknown experts. You will eventually get hurt.

I have never met anyone on this planet yet that I would be willing to sacrifice my wife's life for. That said, the government would be willing to sacrifice her life to save just about any other two Canadians. I think I might want to get in the way of that political decision before it gets put to far into motion. You should as well.


----------



## doctrine

The data on AZ is worse and worse, not better and better. More clots, more deaths. Nova Scotia now have also halted use. RIP. Onto better solutions.


----------



## MrMatt

doctrine said:


> The data on AZ is worse and worse, not better and better. More clots, more deaths. Nova Scotia now have also halted use. RIP. Onto better solutions.


Worse than what occurs naturally?

I haven't heard of the AZ vaccine causing clots anywhere near the rate that they naturally occur on an annual basis.
Again, I'm not saying that there isn't some risk, but there are also potential risks with the Pfizer vaccine.

All I'm saying is that I, like the researcher who found this link, think that there is no reason for this hysterai.









Data and Statistics on Venous Thromboembolism | CDC


Read data highlights about venous thromboembolism.




www.cdc.gov





The precise number of people affected by DVT/PE is unknown, although as many as 900,000 people could be affected (1 to 2 per 1,000) each year in the United States.
Estimates suggest that 60,000-100,000 Americans die of DVT/PE (also called venous thromboembolism).


----------



## doctrine

Then why is it being paused everywhere? There are deaths, and they are occurring in people, like younger women, who shouldn't be dying. The only question is how bad is it. 

Meanwhile, there are two vaccines available that simply work far better. AZ has even proven not to be effective against the South African variant, where it was also axed.

AZ is a shitty vaccine. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are just amazingly effective. And becoming rapidly available.


----------



## cainvest

doctrine said:


> Then why is it being paused everywhere?


Don't forget the other problem with AZ is the limited supply, we're just not getting any here.


----------



## doctrine

There is going to be far less supply in the future, because AZ can't sell their vaccine to anyone unless they are desperate. The EU signed a 3 year contract for 1.8 billion doses from Pfizer. They will not buy one more dose from AZ beyond what they have paid for.


----------



## MrMatt

doctrine said:


> Then why is it being paused everywhere? There are deaths, and they are occurring in people, like younger women, who shouldn't be dying. The only question is how bad is it.
> 
> Meanwhile, there are two vaccines available that simply work far better. AZ has even proven not to be effective against the South African variant, where it was also axed.
> 
> AZ is a shitty vaccine. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are just amazingly effective. And becoming rapidly available.


Pfizer reports of heart issues looks a lot like AZ and clotting a few months ago.

"yeah well we'd expect this to happen normally so it's no big deal"








Israel examining heart inflammation cases in people who received Pfizer COVID shot


Israel's Health Ministry said on Sunday it is examining a small number of cases of heart inflammation in people who had received Pfizer's (PFE.N) COVID-19 vaccine, though it has not yet drawn any conclusions.




www.reuters.com





Just to be clear I don't think there is evidence that Pfizer is increasing the risk of heart inflammation enough to discourage it's use, just as I don't think the AZ blood clot issue is increasing the risk enough to discourage it's use.
I believe the data shows that it is similar or slightly above the expected incidence.

How many younger women have died after taking the AZ vaccine, is this higher than to be expected without taking the AZ vaccine. 
Even more importantly is this higher than the expected death rate due to COVID at this time?


----------



## MrMatt

doctrine said:


> There is going to be far less supply in the future, because AZ can't sell their vaccine to anyone unless they are desperate. The EU signed a 3 year contract for 1.8 billion doses from Pfizer. They will not buy one more dose from AZ beyond what they have paid for.


There's going to be far less supply in the future because every available dose is being sent to India, because they've got nearly 4k deaths a day due to the collapse of their healthcare system.


----------



## gibor365

> How many younger women have died after taking the AZ vaccine, is this higher than to be expected without taking the AZ vaccine.


 Don't exaggerate! I don't know how many young women died from AZ in Mississauga, but as per Peel region website, only 2 Covid related deaths under 40 for both genders from beginning of the pandemic fro city close to 1M people.


----------



## damian13ster

andrewf said:


> Your probably of getting infected _eventually_ is pretty darned high. I would say nearly guaranteed, especially once society largely reopens and there is high levels of exposure in public.


Your probability of being in contact with virus at some point is pretty high (most likely happened to just about everyone already), but probability of getting infected is different. In order to get infected there needs to be certain concentration of the virus that overcomes initial response of your immune system.
It is actually beneficial for you to get in contact with the virus below that threshold since it allows your immune system to get better immunity. That's why herd immunity is not achieved only by vaccines and people actually getting sick. It is also achieved by people being exposed to low concentration of the virus so their immune system learns how to fight it more efficiently.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> Right... because a respiratory illness likely isn't spread by aerosol.
> 
> If they truly honestly believed that, you're delusional.
> They were either lying, or so grossly misinformed it is astonishing.
> 
> Maybe Tam should have gotten in touch with some sort of expert at the WHO, maybe they could have told her about this new disease.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pneumonia of unknown cause – China
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.who.int
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They even linked to a document on how to deal with this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Infection prevention and control of epidemic-and pandemic prone acute respiratory infections in health care
> 
> 
> Publicaciones de la Organización Mundial de la Salud
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.who.int
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can understand lying to preserve medical supplies, I think it is wrong, but I can understand it.
> 
> Either they lied, or they're so grossly incompetent they should be in prison.
> I really really dislike Trudeau, but even I don't think his government is that incompetent.


At the beginning, they believed that this virus was only spread by touching ones face with contaminated hands. You remember this right?

You remember when the who said there was no evidence of human to human transmission? You remember when we were told that we were at a low risk in Canada, and the states for that matter?

Grossly incompetent is harsh, but the experts didn't have a fucking clue at the beginning, and the "saving ppe for the nurses" lie is a frigging fairy tale.


----------



## MrMatt

gibor365 said:


> Don't exaggerate! I don't know how many young women died from AZ in Mississauga, but as per Peel region website, only 2 Covid related deaths under 40 for both genders from beginning of the pandemic fro city close to 1M people.


I get it, you don't want to like the AZ vaccine.
The fact that it isn't really high risk is meaningless to you, you got told what to believe by the media, so you're going to run with it.

I'm not saying anything crazy here.
The risk of the AZ is very low, they only started finding it after several million doses, because it basically happens at a low enough rate that it can easily be mixed in with the normal blood clots experienced by lots of people every year.

Even if you gave everyone in Missisauga an AZ shot, you'd likely get less than a handful of clots, and what 1 death?


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> At the beginning, they believed that this virus was only spread by touching ones face with contaminated hands. You remember this right?


Nope
I remember the pictures posted of people being moved between hospitals in isolation chambers.
I remember people saying "SARS like".
Like I posted an early report from the WHO about this new SARS like diesease. Maybe you don't know, but SARS-CoV-1 was pretty bad.



> You remember when the who said there was no evidence of human to human transmission?


yeah, didn't believe that. You don't lock down an entire city like Wuhan because you think human to human transmission isn't happening.








Wuhan lockdown: A year of China's fight against the Covid pandemic


The world's first coronavirus quarantine began in Wuhan a year ago - how has China changed since then?



www.bbc.com





You remember when they said travel restrictions and quarantines don't stop diesease spread?
I didn't believe that either.



> You remember when we were told that we were at a low risk in Canada, and the states for that matter?


Yeah I remember that, I said they were lying and we should close the border.
I personally stocked up on supplies in February because I saw this coming, go ahead check the post history.



> Grossly incompetent is harsh, but the experts didn't have a fucking clue at the beginning, and the "saving ppe for the nurses" lie is a frigging fairy tale.


Then why would they be stockpiling PPE, shipping it to china, and saying "we don't need it".
Sorry, it just doesn't add up. They were lying, or they're incompetent.

If the PPE wasn't needed, why did they fly it to China?
It's because it was desperately needed and they were hoping to help stop this within China before it got out of hand and became a global problem.
I don't think it was wrong to try, but I think it was too little too late.

But the "they didn't know you needed PPE" is just ridiculous.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> They were lying, or they're incompetent.


Why not both?


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Why not both?


It's a spectrum, but I don't see a third option.


----------



## james4beach

Some European countries, notably Norway, had this exact same concern about higher blood clot rates than the UK indicated. Remember, the UK developed this and they have an intrinsic bias (national & industrial).

Germany and Norway both said the danger with AZ was higher than the UK thought. There was also internal debate in the UK to discontinue use for younger people.

Switzerland and Norway are two countries who completely stopped giving AZ out of concern of the side effects.

I did my own analysis on this using the German & Norwegian figures. But from what I saw, AZ was *still a good idea* for older people, especially over 50 or so, due to the significant danger of COVID. But if you take for example a 20 year old, I think it's a different story (AZ too dangerous) mainly because COVID really isn't that dangerous for a 20 year old.

I think it was a bad idea to give AZ to young Canadians and I was never on board with that idea. I still think it's fine to give to people over 50.


----------



## Money172375

Let’s change the poll to…..would You accept a 2nd dose of AZ?


----------



## gibor365

Money172375 said:


> Let’s change the poll to…..would You accept a 2nd dose of AZ?


No point! What choice people who got 1st AZ dose have?! Or 2nd AZ dose (maybe...depends on the government) or mixing vaccines (again ...depends on the government)! This is Canada LOL


----------



## MrMatt

Money172375 said:


> Let’s change the poll to…..would You accept a 2nd dose of AZ?


Without question.
Risk of clots as low as it was, is even lower for the second dose.
It also seems that AZ has one of the longer lasting effects, which will be nice while we wait for boosters.

Plus with everyone scared of it, it's more likely I'll get it on schedule.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> Without question.
> Risk of clots as low as it was, is even lower for the second dose.
> It also seems that AZ has one of the longer lasting effects, which will be nice while we wait for boosters.
> 
> Plus with everyone scared of it, it's more likely I'll get it on schedule.


As would I. I would prefer the second dose of AZ versus a first shot of pfizer or Moderna. Would we be fully vaccinated in that case, or would we require the second shot of the good, I mean mrna vaccine?


----------



## Beaver101

gibor365 said:


> Don't exaggerate! I don't know how many young women died from AZ in Mississauga, but as per Peel region website, only 2 Covid related deaths under 40 for both genders from beginning of the pandemic fro city close to 1M people.


 ... so what with your stats. Are you saying Mississaugians don't travel/ move about (ie. out of the city of Mississauga to other cities in Ontario) so Torontonians, Hamitonians, etc. can have the most deaths from Covid?

If you still do not understand the concept of the Covid disease, then repeating here:

Covid is *an infectious = contagious = spread from people to people *disease.


----------



## Beaver101

Money172375 said:


> Let’s change the poll to…..would You accept a 2nd dose of AZ?


 ... I think the folks who had no (adversial) reaction from the first dose of AZ will be fine with the 2nd dose. I would be wary about mixing AZ with another different type of vaccine - that would seems truly experimental if not, precedent.


----------



## hboy54

Ontario has AZ doses that are about to expire. I want my second dose.

Everyone is evaluating their personal risk here, not the collective risk. I suggest that abandoning AZ and prolonging the pandemic by say even a month will result in many more deaths in that marginal month than caused by the marginal AZ deaths. Is this not obvious to anyone else? At current ~ 2 month average daily 50 deaths/day is 1500 in a marginal month of delaying things vs a handful by vaccine. The vaccine incident rate is 1/60000 with up to 40% fatality rate. So if every Canadian were vaccinated with AZ, at 38 million population that would be 633 incidents and 253 deaths. So the break even worst case is 5 days delay in bringing this pandemic to heel. If abandoning AZ delays the pandemic resolution by more than 5 days, it costs lives.

At the personal level abandoning AZ might make medical sense, but at the global level not so much. We will make the incorrect decision here because death by vaccine is in our face whereas death by prolonged pandemic is more abstract and amorphous.


----------



## Bananatron

Beaver101 said:


> ... I think the folks who had no (adversial) reaction from the first dose of AZ will be fine with the 2nd dose. I would be wary about mixing AZ with another different type of vaccine - that would seems truly experimental if not, precedent.


If the second shots of AZ are not available, I won't be mixing and matching. I didn't really want the vaccine anyways, and did it more out of a sense of civic duty - so I'm not overly concerned about not being "fully protected" with the second shot.

Right now, while these vaccines are brand new - we still have probably at least a years worth of data to see if there are any medium term effects on the original trial groups. We have no such data with mixing and matching - like you said it would be truly experimental. I'll pass on that opportunity, even if the experts say its OK to do. Who knows, maybe the data will change and the experts will change their mind about mixing and matching vaccines.


----------



## Beaver101

^ I agree with your logic (first paragraph). 

The government will have to "really figure" out on the "supply issue of AZ" , not only for the 2nd dose, but for the future too. Reasons being 1. booster shots, and 2. all the major politicians got it (PM, ON's premier & deputy, TO's mayor). Imagine how the latter will feel if they're getting a cocktail of vaccines.


----------



## OptsyEagle

The need of the 2nd dose is also something that is in the eyes each individual. One needs to consider that for the original virus, only around 1% of the individuals obtained a dose of infection so high, compared to their own immune systems response, that they could not survive it. All the others survived without the help of any vaccine at all. I have to imagine that if that 1% had of received even 1 dose, of any of the vaccines, that almost all of them would still be alive today.

Now with that said, the original virus has pretty much been replaced by more dangerous viruses and when we remove precautions and lockdowns, the average size of the dose of infections will probably rise for all of us, so I will leave that mystery with each reader to determine for themselves. If they offer me a 2nd dose of a vaccine, I consider safe and effective, I will roll up my sleeve right away and accept it thankfully. Until then, I feel a lot stronger with the one dose I have already received and will monitor the situation closely.


----------



## Bananatron

Heard this morning that Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin, the man in charge of Canada's vaccine procurement, says that there will be enough AZ for everyone to get their second dose.


----------



## MrMatt

hboy54 said:


> Ontario has AZ doses that are about to expire. I want my second dose.
> 
> Everyone is evaluating their personal risk here, not the collective risk.


Nope, I'm very self centered, and when we were at 4k cases/day in Ontario to me it was an obvious no brainer to get the AZ shot, or any shot.
having gotten the first shot, I still want my second AZ shot.





> I suggest that abandoning AZ and prolonging the pandemic by say even a month will result in many more deaths in that marginal month than caused by the marginal AZ deaths. Is this not obvious to anyone else? At current ~ 2 month average daily 50 deaths/day is 1500 in a marginal month of delaying things vs a handful by vaccine. The vaccine incident rate is 1/60000 with up to 40% fatality rate. So if every Canadian were vaccinated with AZ, at 38 million population that would be 633 incidents and 253 deaths. So the break even worst case is 5 days delay in bringing this pandemic to heel. If abandoning AZ delays the pandemic resolution by more than 5 days, it costs lives.
> 
> At the personal level abandoning AZ might make medical sense, but at the global level not so much. We will make the incorrect decision here because death by vaccine is in our face whereas death by prolonged pandemic is more abstract and amorphous.


In norway it might make sense, in India they should be using AZ.
Personally in Ontario today I think AZ makes sense for most people.

I'm about as scared of taking 2 vaccines for COVID as I am taking a new flu shot every year, or mixing Measles Mumps and Rubella in a single shot.


----------



## andrewf

3 month dose interval seems to work well for Pfizer:









Delay in giving second jabs of Pfizer vaccine improves immunity


Study finds antibodies against Sars-CoV-2 three-and-a-half times higher in people vaccinated again after 12 weeks rather than three




www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> I'm about as scared of taking 2 vaccines for COVID as I am taking a new flu shot every year, or mixing Measles Mumps and Rubella in a single shot.


I think I'm going through a similar thought/concern process as you did when Canada decided to extend the times between doses. IIRC you were one of the vocal ones that had concerns about it? The concern being, this isn't what the manufacturer recommended.

Turns out, spacing the doses might even be better than not. Maybe we'll see the same thing with mixing vaccines?


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> I think I'm going through a similar thought/concern process as you did when Canada decided to extend the times between doses. IIRC you were one of the vocal ones that had concerns about it? The concern being, this isn't what the manufacturer recommended.
> 
> Turns out, spacing the doses might even be better than not. Maybe we'll see the same thing with mixing vaccines?


Yes I was very upset, I thought it was wrong. 

However at 4k cases/day in Ontario, and hospitals putting people in tents, and what i"m hearing from staff burnout and shortages, I accepted that handling the surge as the priority, as opposed to any longer term concern.

Really when you have incomplete data, you have to do a risk tradeoff.
I thought they were wrong, but as it got worse the risks changed. Now with extended interval data becoming available, it looks like extended intervals actually might be the preferred option for many people.


----------



## andrewf

Bananatron said:


> I think I'm going through a similar thought/concern process as you did when Canada decided to extend the times between doses. IIRC you were one of the vocal ones that had concerns about it? The concern being, this isn't what the manufacturer recommended.
> 
> Turns out, spacing the doses might even be better than not. Maybe we'll see the same thing with mixing vaccines?


Given the rush to get the vaccines approved for use, it makes sense that the pharma companies would have used short intervals between doses for their clinical trials. And maybe once approved, they did not continue with further trials to test longer intervals, especially since the results were very good for three weeks and they were approved. I think there is reason to believe from other vaccines that longer intervals is not dangerous, so the decision to pursue this strategy was not unscientific.


----------



## cainvest

MrMatt said:


> Really when you have incomplete data, you have to do a risk tradeoff.
> I thought they were wrong, but as it got worse the risks changed. Now with extended interval data becoming available, it looks like extended intervals actually might be the preferred option for many people.


It's also starting to look like second shots will come in well before 4 months.


----------



## latebuyer

Yes I hope they don't wait for more vaccine mixing study results before giving the second shot. I want my second dose now. One of the reasons I took astrazeneca was to get my second shot earlier. Just to add my understanding why Europe doesn't give astrazeneca is because they have a lawsuit against them for inadequate supply


----------



## like_to_retire

cainvest said:


> It's also starting to look like second shots will come in well before 4 months.


Still waiting. Lots of talk, no action. I thinks it's probably more likely they'll extend the 4 months further since they're giving the Pfizer to everyone down to 12 year olds.

ltr


----------



## cainvest

like_to_retire said:


> Still waiting. Lots of talk, no action. I thinks it's probably more likely they'll extend the 4 months further since they're giving the Pfizer to everyone down to 12 year olds.


Our second shots start on May 22nd. Not sure about other provinces but I don't think many are very far behind us in MB.


----------



## james4beach

cainvest said:


> Our second shots start on May 22nd. Not sure about other provinces but I don't think many are very far behind us in MB.


Also, Pfizer deliveries keep increasing. The figure I saw initially was 2 million doses/wk this month and 2.5 million doses/wk next month. It might have even increased since those early figures. That's something like 20 million doses over just these two months... let's remember that a total of maybe 30 million Canadians will be vaccinated. And we have many millions more doses coming in the following months.

We're getting absolutely MASSIVE vaccine deliveries. Pull up a chart of vaccination progress of say the UK vs Canada. The vaccination curve from Canada has accelerated in the last ~ 2 months.

My parents are likely going to be scheduled for their second shot in just a few weeks. This isn't a question of waiting many months.

Also I want to point out that younger people are actually the ones working in all the dangerous jobs, at stores, in factories, warehouses etc. These people deserve to be protected and many don't have the option of staying home and staying safe. *They have to work*.

They deserve to get vaccinated as much as anyone else. A 30 year old is still in significant danger from COVID.


----------



## like_to_retire

james4beach said:


> My parents are likely going to be scheduled for their second shot in just a few weeks. This isn't a question of waiting many months.


I'm about half way through my sentence and no one has phoned me. It's still scheduled for 4 months and will likely stay that way since they decided to give the vaccines to everyone before protecting seniors fully.



james4beach said:


> They deserve to get vaccinated as much as anyone else. A 30 year old is still in significant danger from COVID.


So from this chart you think a 30 year old and 70+ shouldn't be subject to some form of priority?
I'm sure the 30 year has to work, but the senior has to live.










ltr


----------



## Bananatron

like_to_retire said:


> I'm about half way through my sentence and no one has phoned me. It's still scheduled for 4 months and will likely stay that way since they decided to give the vaccines to everyone before protecting seniors fully.
> 
> 
> 
> So from this chart you think a 30 year old and 70+ shouldn't be subject to some form of priority?
> I'm sure the 30 year has to work, but the senior has to live.
> 
> View attachment 21677
> 
> 
> ltr


Seniors did get priority. They were given doses first, when supplies were low.

Seniors aren't dying because their second shot is delayed. They're not being hospitalized because their second shot is delayed. They're not even getting covid with minor symptoms because their second shot is delayed.

Recent data from BC is showing that 98% of all recent Covid cases (cases, not deaths) have been from those unvaccinated or within 3 weeks of their first shot.









COVID-19 modelling: 98% of B.C.'s recent cases were unvaccinated or newly vaccinated


Just over 98 per cent of B.C.'s recent COVID-19 cases involved people who were either unvaccinated or had only been vaccinated for less than three weeks, according to health officials.



bc.ctvnews.ca





Its really quite selfish to prioritize peace of mind over the protection of the entire population, especially when the emerging data continues to support the decision to delay second doses, and is looking like it actually offers superior protection to the manufacturers recommended timeline.

Its time to walk back from your position of opposing the delaying of second shots. The data does not support it.


----------



## like_to_retire

Bananatron said:


> Its time to walk back from your position of opposing the delaying of second shots. The data does not support it.


AstraZeneca-Oxford developer blasts Canada's approach to vaccine, says 'messing around is going to cost lives'

_Oxford University regius professor of medicine Sir John Bell told CTV News’ Question Period, Canada’s approach to AstraZeneca use specifically is reflective of the country’s overall vaccine strategy: “acting on a lot of hearsay not facts.”

“What we can see is that the more people with a second dose, the more people will have antibody levels that are high enough to deal with the Indian variant, which is where we are at the moment, in the U.K. So my advice is get people two doses, as fast as you can and hunker down,” he said.

And on the mixing of vaccines, Bell, who has intimate knowledge of the study currently taking place at the University of Oxford, said initial findings show severe side effect outcomes.
“Our experience to date is that it produces pretty severe reactogenicity, so severe that we don't think that's going to be viable and by that I mean, you get your second dose if you flip it over, you'll get really sick, so I would not advise that,” he said._

ltr


----------



## Bananatron

like_to_retire said:


> AstraZeneca-Oxford developer blasts Canada's approach to vaccine, says 'messing around is going to cost lives'
> 
> _Oxford University regius professor of medicine Sir John Bell told CTV News’ Question Period, Canada’s approach to AstraZeneca use specifically is reflective of the country’s overall vaccine strategy: “acting on a lot of hearsay not facts.”
> 
> “What we can see is that the more people with a second dose, the more people will have antibody levels that are high enough to deal with the Indian variant, which is where we are at the moment, in the U.K. So my advice is get people two doses, as fast as you can and hunker down,” he said.
> 
> And on the mixing of vaccines, Bell, who has intimate knowledge of the study currently taking place at the University of Oxford, said initial findings show severe side effect outcomes.
> “Our experience to date is that it produces pretty severe reactogenicity, so severe that we don't think that's going to be viable and by that I mean, you get your second dose if you flip it over, you'll get really sick, so I would not advise that,” he said._
> 
> ltr











Delaying second Covid vaccine doses can save lives, study finds


Modelling suggests countries struggling to immunise populations could adopt UK strategy




www.theguardian.com





_They found that getting a single dose to more people by delaying the second shot would save lives. In people under 65, where the vaccine efficacy is 80% and only 0.1% to 0.3% of the population a day is vaccinated, between 47 and 26 deaths per 100,000 people could be averted, they say__ in their paper in the British Medical Journal._

If you can show me some data that shows delaying the second dose is costing lives, I'd love to see it.


----------



## OptsyEagle

like_to_retire said:


> AstraZeneca-Oxford developer blasts Canada's approach to vaccine, says 'messing around is going to cost lives'
> 
> _Oxford University regius professor of medicine Sir John Bell told CTV News’ Question Period, Canada’s approach to AstraZeneca use specifically is reflective of the country’s overall vaccine strategy: “acting on a lot of hearsay not facts.”
> 
> “What we can see is that the more people with a second dose, the more people will have antibody levels that are high enough to deal with the Indian variant, which is where we are at the moment, in the U.K. So my advice is get people two doses, as fast as you can and hunker down,” he said.
> 
> And on the mixing of vaccines, Bell, who has intimate knowledge of the study currently taking place at the University of Oxford, said initial findings show severe side effect outcomes.
> “Our experience to date is that it produces pretty severe reactogenicity, so severe that we don't think that's going to be viable and by that I mean, you get your second dose if you flip it over, you'll get really sick, so I would not advise that,” he said._
> 
> ltr


Did he mention how many lives were saved by getting vaccine to more people by using 1 dose and putting out the 2nd, less important dose? Also, the idea of mixing doses is all due to Astrazeneca. Their blood clot issue and of course their delivery issue. Do we really want a guy from Oxford University telling us that we should not do this. I think that advice is more then a little tainted.


----------



## cainvest

like_to_retire said:


> So from this chart you think a 30 year old and 70+ shouldn't be subject to some form of priority?
> I'm sure the 30 year has to work, but the senior has to live.


Here's the data from MB reported last week ....

_As of Monday, 0.09% people contracted COVID-19 more than 2 weeks after vaccination

That places the chances of dying from COVID-19 for a vaccinated or partly vaccinated Manitoban at one in 68,731, or less than a quarter of the chance getting struck by lightning during your lifetime, assuming you live to 80_


----------



## like_to_retire

cainvest said:


> _As of Monday, 0.09% people contracted COVID-19 more than 2 weeks after vaccination_


How about after 4 months.

ltr


----------



## cainvest

like_to_retire said:


> How about after 4 months.


Our vaccine roll out started in Dec so that data includes some that are over 4 months. 

Also, since we're starting second shots this week it's looking like the majority of people will be done way sooner than 4 months.


----------



## Bananatron

like_to_retire said:


> How about after 4 months.
> 
> ltr







__





CityNews







www.680news.com





_Waiting for a second dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine may offer older people more protection than getting the jab on time, according to a new study.

Researchers in the U.K. looked at 175 people over the age of 80 — giving half their second Pfizer shot at the three-week interval recommended by the drug maker, and making the other half wait 12 weeks for their final dose.

They found the antibody response of those who waited was three-and-a-half times greater than in those who had the second shot within the recommended time frame._

You don't need to selfishly hoard all the vaccine for yourself. You're protected, and your fellow Canadians deserve the same protection.


----------



## latebuyer

This is what i thought, that astrazeneca was primarily taken by gen x









Opinion: The AstraZeneca fiasco is the latest example of the Gen X curse


The AstraZeneca vaccine’s removal from the medical landscape – driven by politics and ineptitude – is yet more evidence that the statistical books never seem to balance in Gen Xers’ favour




www.theglobeandmail.com





What is gen x at age 42-55? Also the article that person posted states that they are waiting for more vaccine results before they give astrazeneca second dose.


----------



## ykphil

I had my first shot two weeks ago. I had no side effects whatsoever but it was my night to cook so I just used it as an excuse to get out of it. It worked, I'm waiting impatiently for shot no. 2...


----------



## newfoundlander61

My side effects from the 2nd shot of AZ lasted 3 days. Same old stuff you hear about in some cases as its different with everyone.


----------



## Spudd

newfoundlander61 said:


> My side effects from the 2nd shot of AZ lasted 3 days. Same old stuff you hear about in some cases as its different with everyone.


Gosh, that sounds like no fun. Did you have side effects from the first shot? I heard the first shot was worse with AZ, and I was sick for a day afterwards. I was hoping my second would be better!


----------



## newfoundlander61

I had much less side effects with the 1st shot, felt overall poorly for about one day and that was it.


----------



## gibor365

I always read that 2nd AZ shot is milder than 1st one  After 1st AZ my wife felt bad and had fever for 3 days.....she should have 2nd sometime in future)


----------



## leoc2

2nd doses of AZ had no side effects for the Mrs and I. Our first dose made us sick for 2 days.


----------



## latebuyer

What are people thinking about vaccine mixing? With trudeau's doctor and even bonnie henry recommending astrazeneca, I'm inclined to get that.


----------



## like_to_retire

I think the mixing is a bad idea. If I had received an AZ as dose 1 then I would stick with that.

ltr


----------



## Spudd

Mixing rocks, apparently. This is a link to a Twitter post talking about a new paper (there's a link to the paper inside the Twitter post). They found much better immune response, especially to the variants, with the mixing protocol.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1400848457687089152


----------



## damian13ster

Depends. It is a trade-off. Heard that it gives 7x the antibodies level, but also that side-effects are 10x more likely to happen. Personally I wouldn't mix because side effects sound scarier to me than tiny higher chance of getting infected, but if I was immunocompromised or in a group that is less likely to see side effects, decision might be different.


----------



## james4beach

I'm concerned about side effects as well. I would rather not mix brands.


----------



## Kilbarry20

My wife & I got our second dose of AZ 6 days ago. 
Still standing.
ZERO side effects- as per Round 1.

No pearl clutching for us.


----------



## Benting

There is another point to consider. Currently PZ and MDR are developing booster shot. These probably would deal with the variants that appears lately. However, have not heard from AZ. Guess those who has 2 doses of PZ or MDR would have no problem for the booster shot. But, what about those who has AZ/AZ or AZ/PZ and AZ/MDR ? Would it be better for AZ/PZ/PZ+ for instance....


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> I'm concerned about side effects as well. I would rather not mix brands.


Why?
They've determined it's safe, and likely offers better protection.

Have you ever looked at the brand on a vaccine vial before?


----------



## damian13ster

MrMatt said:


> Why?
> They've determined it's safe, and likely offers better protection.
> 
> Have you ever looked at the brand on a vaccine vial before?











Covid vaccines: Mixing increases reports of mild side-effects


Researchers are still analysing whether injecting two different vaccines leads to better protection.



www.bbc.com





They have determined side-effects increase significantly. All up to personal choices, but data should be provided


----------



## Spudd

The side effects are just feeling sick for a day or two. I'll take that if it means better protection against the variants.


----------



## Bananatron

Would the test subjects that mix vaccines be considered fully vaccinated? Or would we have to get a second shot of Pfizer making it 3 shots total?

I'm really considering just delaying my second shot for a few months here till we figure out what the hell is going on. If we find out in 6 months everyone who was previously considered vaccinated needs a MRNA booster shot I'll maybe get one of those.


----------



## damian13ster

Spudd said:


> The side effects are just feeling sick for a day or two. I'll take that if it means better protection against the variants.


Of course. And weighting pros and cons you decided it is better for you.
There are people who weighting pros and cons have decided it isn't.
There isn't a right or wrong answer here since it depends from priorities, individuals' health, their history, etc.


----------



## MrMatt

damian13ster said:


> Covid vaccines: Mixing increases reports of mild side-effects
> 
> 
> Researchers are still analysing whether injecting two different vaccines leads to better protection.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They have determined side-effects increase significantly. All up to personal choices, but data should be provided


The "side effects" of a strong immune response. It's a bit of discomfort, not people dying.

FWIW my reaction to dose 1 was significant.


----------



## damian13ster

MrMatt said:


> The "side effects" of a strong immune response. It's a bit of discomfort, not people dying.
> 
> FWIW my reaction to dose 1 was significant.


Yes. You also didn't see people dying in AZ trials, yet they did when amount of people receiving the vaccine increased. This trial was done only on 830 people, and only aged above 50 - the group that already had significantly lower risk of serious side effects.
Is it possible that mixing doesn't increase risk of death? - Yes.
Is it possible it does - Yes.

All about willingness to take risks based on your own tolerance, age, health, size of cohorts used in studies, time elapsed, etc.


----------



## MrMatt

damian13ster said:


> Yes. You also didn't see people dying in AZ trials, yet they did when amount of people receiving the vaccine increased. This trial was done only on 830 people, and only aged above 50 - the group that already had significantly lower risk of serious side effects.
> Is it possible that mixing doesn't increase risk of death? - Yes.
> Is it possible it does - Yes.
> 
> All about willingness to take risks based on your own tolerance, age, health, size of cohorts used in studies, time elapsed, etc.


People dying from AZ vaccine was trivial, like one in a million. I think only 5 in a million even had the clots.

Every medical intervention has the risk of serious side effects, that is why I don't think governments should mandate or force them.
That being said, the level of risk is incredibly low. Remember we mix and match different flu shots every year, and babies get a whole slew of different vaccines.


----------



## sags

The vaccines had no long term studies or history.......so nobody knows what future problems will occur.

The media is full of ads from lawyers with class action lawsuits against drugs that were around for a long time before the problems were revealed.

Hope for the best but plan for the worst.


----------



## damian13ster

sags said:


> The vaccines had no long term studies or history.......so nobody knows what future problems will occur.
> 
> The media is full of ads from lawyers with class action lawsuits against drugs that were around for a long time before the problems were revealed.
> 
> Hope for the best but plan for the worst.


This is precisely the reason why in US one can't encourage, promote, and advertise vaccines or drugs under EUA. They can only do it after full approval. 
But it is 2021 - who cares about such trivial things as law? - Let's have a million dollar lottery!


----------



## latebuyer

It seems like a complaint against the vaccine mixing is there is no proof of the long term efficacy of taking the vaccine that way. However i’m wondering if there is any proof of astrazeneca or pfizer’s long term efficacy? I’m also wondering if one could take the second dose of astrazeneca then still take a booster from pfizer once the efficacy of vaccine mixing is proven. On the other hand, astrozeneca is developing a booster for the south african virus. I don’t know what to do.:-(


----------



## james4beach

MrMatt said:


> They've determined it's safe, and likely offers better protection.
> 
> Have you ever looked at the brand on a vaccine vial before?


I've read more, and I changed my mind. I received Moderna and am 100% board with getting either Pfizer or Moderna for the second shot.

It turns out we do actually already mix brands of other common vaccines. For example, when I was growing up I received a MMR shot. This is actually noteworthy for other adults here, and I posted details in this thread: check your age against this article, because many Canadians received insufficient MMR vaccination.

Note in that thread that @m3s also mentioned that he's frequently received MMR boosters. Getting second/third shots is a standard practice with many common vaccinations. COVID-19 is likely going to become one of these as well.

Anyway, I told my US doctor about this and he said I should get another MMR booster shot. Let me point out this is about 20 or 25 years after the first shot, in case anyone thinks the timing of this stuff is too sensitive.

They definitely mixed brands, because there's no way this was the same MMR shot I got 20 years ago... but it was the recommended course of action.


----------



## Kilbarry20

My wife & I are now10 days post our second AZ Vax.

ZERO issues with either one!


----------



## andrewf

My dad, in his 70s, is getting dose 2 next week.


----------



## gibor365

latebuyer said:


> It seems like a complaint against the vaccine mixing is there is no proof of the long term efficacy of taking the vaccine that way. However i’m wondering if there is any proof of astrazeneca or pfizer’s long term efficacy? I’m also wondering if one could take the second dose of astrazeneca then still take a booster from pfizer once the efficacy of vaccine mixing is proven. On the other hand, astrozeneca is developing a booster for the south african virus. I don’t know what to do.:-(


My wife has a problem regarding 2nd dose.... She got AZ as the first one... Now we are discussing if it's better for her to get 2nd Pfizer or AZ ....she got freaked out when expiration date for AZ somehow got extended by 1 month....
P.S. Would you buy and eat expired sour cream that SuperStore decided to extend by one month?!


----------



## MrMatt

gibor365 said:


> My wife has a problem regarding 2nd dose.... She got AZ as the first one... Now we are discussing if it's better for her to get 2nd Pfizer or AZ ....she got freaked out when expiration date for AZ somehow got extended by 1 month....
> P.S. Would you buy and eat expired sour cream that SuperStore decided to extend by one month?!


Would you wear a hockey helmet that expired by 1 month?


----------



## Kilbarry20

gibor365 said:


> My wife has a problem regarding 2nd dose.... She got AZ as the first one... Now we are discussing if it's better for her to get 2nd Pfizer or AZ ....she got freaked out when expiration date for AZ somehow got extended by 1 month....
> P.S. Would you buy and eat expired sour cream that SuperStore decided to extend by one month?!


I have a background with the last analogy made here and of course- you would not. However, Manufacturers of Food products put a BBD on all manner of products, even when they are absolutely not required by law- say cereal or canned soup. That is more an efficacy date. Your question likely falls towards that end, rather than a perishable product.

My wife & I certainly got our second AZ 11 days ago, based on that analysis.


----------



## damian13ster

18 year old woman killed by Astra Zeneca in Italy.
Emergency surgery to remove blood clot from her brain was unsuccessful.
Debate about putting in age restrictions again is starting


----------



## gibor365

MrMatt said:


> Would you wear a hockey helmet that expired by 1 month?


I wouldn't if there will be expiration date on this helmet...

Would you take pills (not some kind of vitamins) that expired by 1 month?! I wouldn't


----------



## MrMatt

gibor365 said:


> I wouldn't if there will be expiration date on this helmet...
> 
> Would you take pills (not some kind of vitamins) that expired by 1 month?! I wouldn't


I would, because I know how expiry dates work.

I have epsom salts with an expiry date.


----------



## damian13ster

I think the bigger issue isn't the actual expiration date.
It is pure idiocy of people in charge.
You have 3h worth of supply that will go bad at the end of may
You have them with you since march/april.
You know there is a vaccine hesitancy because of botched messaging.
You have people who had first dose of AZ waiting for a 2nd dose, waiting for longer than actually prescribed by manufacturer.
So you decide that instead of using that 3h supply at any time in this 2 month period you will communicate that you are going to change expiry date.
Then you will communicate you didn't have enough AZ vaccine (the one you let expire), so now we have to mix the vaccines with completely different mechanism.

Do they actually have meetings where the main goal is to explore the ways to demonstrate even more incompetency?
No wonder getting to 75% vaccinated is becoming an issue with the people we have in charge.


----------



## Bananatron

So now that we're eligible to get our second dose of AZ, and its only available for booking one day, July 2. Likely due to lack of supplies. We have a long overdue vacation planned that week and won't be around.


I have zero interest in mixing technologies, I sure hope they can get some more supplies in for those that stood in line to get the inferior high risk vaccine when it was asked of us.


----------



## gibor365

damian13ster said:


> I think the bigger issue isn't the actual expiration date.
> It is pure idiocy of people in charge.
> You have 3h worth of supply that will go bad at the end of may
> You have them with you since march/april.
> You know there is a vaccine hesitancy because of botched messaging.
> You have people who had first dose of AZ waiting for a 2nd dose, waiting for longer than actually prescribed by manufacturer.
> So you decide that instead of using that 3h supply at any time in this 2 month period you will communicate that you are going to change expiry date.
> Then you will communicate you didn't have enough AZ vaccine (the one you let expire), so now we have to mix the vaccines with completely different mechanism.
> 
> Do they actually have meetings where the main goal is to explore the ways to demonstrate even more incompetency?
> No wonder getting to 75% vaccinated is becoming an issue with the people we have in charge.


I'm exactly anticipated that this is going to happen , this is why I opened this thread and decided to skip AZ.... My wife


damian13ster said:


> I think the bigger issue isn't the actual expiration date.
> It is pure idiocy of people in charge.
> You have 3h worth of supply that will go bad at the end of may
> You have them with you since march/april.
> You know there is a vaccine hesitancy because of botched messaging.
> You have people who had first dose of AZ waiting for a 2nd dose, waiting for longer than actually prescribed by manufacturer.
> So you decide that instead of using that 3h supply at any time in this 2 month period you will communicate that you are going to change expiry date.
> Then you will communicate you didn't have enough AZ vaccine (the one you let expire), so now we have to mix the vaccines with completely different mechanism.
> 
> Do they actually have meetings where the main goal is to explore the ways to demonstrate even more incompetency?
> No wonder getting to 75% vaccinated is becoming an issue with the people we have in charge.


I'm exactly anticipated that this is going to happen , this is why I opened this thread and decided to skip AZ.... My wife is more naïve, she believes in Canada, so she decided to get AZ and now she understood that I was right...


----------



## Beaver101

^ Since you brought this up (meaning don't take it personally). I would hope your wife believes in Canada since she works for one of the big banks so stop blaming her.


----------



## latebuyer

I’m in bc and i can either get the astrazeneca vaccine tomorrow or wait for the vaccine mixing shot on july 8th. I wanted the vaccine mixing but thats a long time to wait on the other hand i thought astrazeneca was most effective at 12 weeks, not 8 weeks. I can't decide! Its true the delta variant isn’t as prevalent as it is in ontario so maybe i could wait. Also maybe vaccine mixing won’t work. Arrgh.


----------



## MrMatt

@latebuyer

I'm in Ontario, but I'm getting my second shot ASAP.
I got AZ for my first shot, if you're concerned with delta, getting the second shot as soon as possible is IMO important, moreso if AZ was your first shot.









Fully vaccinated people have gotten the Delta COVID variant. Should we be worried? - Macleans.ca


New data from the U.K. shows the vaccines do a terrific job keeping people out of hospital, even if they get the variant. So let's get needles into arms.




www.macleans.ca





I think it's pretty obvious Delta will be dominant soon,


----------



## Dilbert

Got my second AZ Monday with zero side effects as of this morning. I was surprised how easy it was to get. I merely sauntered into the Shoppers Drug Mart in Long Branch around 8:00 AM and I was the only one at the pharmacy counter. I was out in less than twenty-five minutes.


----------



## gibor365

Dilbert said:


> Got my second AZ Monday with zero side effects as of this morning. I was surprised how easy it was to get. I merely sauntered into the Shoppers Drug Mart in Long Branch around 8:00 AM and I was the only one at the pharmacy counter. I was out in less than twenty-five minutes.


In Ontario it's easier to find Pfizer for 2nd shot ... My wife had 1st AZ and now booked for 2nd Pfizer....So, she decided to mix.....I don't have opinion about mixing...
Another question if she would be counted as fully vaccinated for international travel............


----------



## andrewf

gibor365 said:


> I wouldn't if there will be expiration date on this helmet...
> 
> Would you take pills (not some kind of vitamins) that expired by 1 month?! I wouldn't


They made a best (cautious) guess about how long the vaccine would survive and remain effective. Further testing following release demonstrated that the vaccine was more stable than they initially modelled which enabled them to extend the shelf life. It didn't turn into a pumpkin at midnight or spoiled milk.


----------



## james4beach

Does anyone know where we can monitor tracking on how widespread Delta is?

The urgency for the second dose really has to do with the Delta situation. Waiting 8 weeks or 12 weeks between doses is perfectly fine, and a longer wait might even produce a stronger immunity. But this has to be balanced against the urgency of Delta, since people with one shot have minimal protection against it.

Waiting that extra month delay won't do you any good if you catch Delta in the mean time.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> Does anyone know where we can monitor tracking on how widespread Delta is?
> (edited)
> Waiting that extra month delay won't do you any good if you catch Delta in the mean time.


They report it, but the data on Delta is limited, though they are tracking it more now. Not all positive tests are screened for variants, but I expect they'll be screenign for Delta more since there are so few positive cases to worry about.

For London, we dont' seem to have much Delta here.





Summary of COVID-19 Cases in Middlesex-London — Middlesex-London Health Unit


Find the summary of COVID-19 cases in Middlesex-London. This information is updated daily at 12 noon.



www.healthunit.com


----------



## Bananatron

james4beach said:


> Does anyone know where we can monitor tracking on how widespread Delta is?
> 
> The urgency for the second dose really has to do with the Delta situation. Waiting 8 weeks or 12 weeks between doses is perfectly fine, and a longer wait might even produce a stronger immunity. But this has to be balanced against the urgency of Delta, since people with one shot have minimal protection against it.
> 
> Waiting that extra month delay won't do you any good if you catch Delta in the mean time.


I think that we will see in time that the concerns with the delta variant and single doses were highly overblown. As they were for the Brazilian, south African, and UK variants.

Remember, we have seen rapid declines in Canada with the Alpha variant being the dominant strain and most of the population only having one dose. The same study that said that one dose was only 33% effective against the Delta variant also said that one dose was only 50% effective against the Alpha variant.

We know that this information is not correct, something like 95%-98% of all Covid cases/hospitalizations/deaths are from completely unvaccinated people.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> I think that we will see in time that the concerns with the delta variant and single doses were highly overblown. As they were for the Brazilian, south African, and UK variants.
> 
> Remember, we have seen rapid declines in Canada with the Alpha variant being the dominant strain and most of the population only having one dose. The same study that said that one dose was only 33% effective against the Delta variant also said that one dose was only 50% effective against the Alpha variant.
> 
> We know that this information is not correct, something like 95%-98% of all Covid cases/hospitalizations/deaths are from completely unvaccinated people.


You need to understand that 50% effective might be enough to change the spread from growing to shrinking. 
The issue with Delta is that it spreads so much more that only 30, or 50% might not be enough to stop it without other measures.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> You need to understand that 50% effective might be enough to change the spread from growing to shrinking.
> The issue with Delta is that it spreads so much more that only 30, or 50% might not be enough to stop it without other measures.


The point is, these numbers being thrown around are likely not accurate at all. Its a combination of having an abundance of caution, and good old clickbaity journalism.

Look, 2 people died from the Delta variant in Calgary. One was fully vacccinated, too.









Province records two deaths related to Delta variant at Foothills Medical Centre outbreak


Two patients who tested positive for the COVID-19 Delta variant at the Foothills Medical Centre have died.




calgaryherald.com








> One of the deaths was a patient who had received two doses of COVID-19 vaccine and was fully immunized, while the other person had not received any doses, said Alberta Health Services spokesman Kerry Williamson. Both were in their 80s.


^^A couple of 80+ year old hospital patients passed away. No disrespect intended, but that's generally what 80+ year old hospital patients do, is pass away. Especially if they are unvaccinated against covid.

You telling me they don't have this delta variant in Alabama, where 37% have one dose and 30% are fully vaccinated? You can't fudge the numbers on a pandemic. Either people are getting sick, and filling up hospitals, or they aren't.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> You telling me they don't have this delta variant in Alabama, where 37% have one dose and 30% are fully vaccinated? You can't fudge the numbers on a pandemic. Either people are getting sick, and filling up hospitals, or they aren't.


Alabama is very different than Canada, particularly Urban Canadian centers.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> Alabama is very different than Canada, particularly Urban Canadian centers.


Replace it with any state of your choice then.









U.S. Coronavirus Map: Tracking the Trends


Check our interactive coronavirus map for the latest U.S. trends by state and county, plus recommendations on what they mean for you.




www.mayoclinic.org


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Replace it with any state of your choice then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Coronavirus Map: Tracking the Trends
> 
> 
> Check our interactive coronavirus map for the latest U.S. trends by state and county, plus recommendations on what they mean for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mayoclinic.org


Alabama isn't Peel Region


----------



## sags

US states with high vaccination rates are seeing declining infection rates. The infection rate is rising in states with lower vaccination rates.


----------



## MrMatt

sags said:


> US states with high vaccination rates are seeing declining infection rates. The infection rate is rising in states with lower vaccination rates.


Source? Looks like Florida and Texas are still down from their last wave.
Yet another made up/unsupported Sags post.


----------



## Bananatron

MrMatt said:


> Alabama isn't Peel Region


I'm not intimately familiar with the Peel Region. How would Atlanta, GA compare? They're about at 41%/34%.


----------



## james4beach

MrMatt said:


> They report it, but the data on Delta is limited, though they are tracking it more now. Not all positive tests are screened for variants, but I expect they'll be screenign for Delta more since there are so few positive cases to worry about.
> 
> For London, we dont' seem to have much Delta here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Summary of COVID-19 Cases in Middlesex-London — Middlesex-London Health Unit
> 
> 
> Find the summary of COVID-19 cases in Middlesex-London. This information is updated daily at 12 noon.
> 
> 
> 
> www.healthunit.com


I looked at a recent analysis for BC. They have minimal tracking of delta, so it's hard to know how much of it is around here.

The stats on delta in BC currently show that the number of delta cases is not decreasing. So they seem to be "sticky". The question everyone is asking now is whether delta will go exponential. It certainly has in the UK.


----------



## Money172375

Some delta info in Ontario. R(t) is 1.23….it will quickly takeover.









Ontario Dashboard - Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table


NOTICE: This website is no longer updated.If you have questions about previously published Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table resources, please email [email protected] Current Status in Ontario Contents Current Status in Ontario Current COVID-19 Risk in Ontario by Vaccination Status...




covid19-sciencetable.ca


----------



## milhouse

james4beach said:


> The question everyone is asking now is whether delta will go exponential. It certainly has in the UK.


In responding to a reporter question during a recent briefings, the BC provincial health officer seems to think we might be able to avoid a Delta surge compared to in the UK because of a comparatively higher vaccine rate in the younger demographic. Hope she's right.


----------



## gibor365

Do you remember when our dictators Trudeau, Ford, Hajdu, Elliot etc made a huge hype that they received 1st dose of AZ?! It was published everywhere around the World.... I tried to find out what they got for 2nd dose and there is absolutely NO ANY INFO! 
From the beginning , I posted that IMHO those were fake news and all our "so-called leaders" got AZ only for the cameras and long time before , they got both doses of Pfizer in proper 21 days interval.


----------



## james4beach

milhouse said:


> In responding to a reporter question during a recent briefings, the BC provincial health officer seems to think we might be able to avoid a Delta surge compared to in the UK because of a comparatively higher vaccine rate in the younger demographic. Hope she's right.


Interesting. I certainly hope it plays out like that. I saw some UBC modelling for the province and it's very uncertain on the delta trajectory.

Things look good at the moment though. Today I had a haircut, and also met some friends for outdoor patio drinks and catching up after a long time. What a great day!

I hope the vaccine is doing its job, because one of the employees in the barber shop didn't wear a mask at all, and the person cutting my hair wore a mouth guard shield kind of thing which is definitely is not a mask, and mostly useless. It still amazes me that all these months later, I still see people in service jobs who can't get the basics right.

But that's human nature.


----------



## Bananatron

...and the final death blow to AZ in Canada.









mRNA vaccine now preferred as second dose following AstraZeneca shot: NACI


The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) is now recommending that people who received a first dose of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine receive a second dose of an mRNA vaccine, such as Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna.




www.ctvnews.ca





So, now a million plus Canadians are in a weird position. Canada will accept mixed dose individuals as "fully vaccinated". On a global scale, this doesn't mean much.









Fans who had AstraZeneca vaccine banned from Bruce Springsteen concert


Anyone who has had the AstraZeneca vaccine will be barred from attending Bruce Springsteen’s comeback shows in New York next week.




www.standard.co.uk





Are those that took the first dose of AZ going to have to get 3 shots to be considered globally vaccinated? Will that poor fella from BC have to take 2 additional Mrna shots if he wants to travel? Is there any harm in taking more vaccine than you really need?

Would a waiting time between AZ and 2 doses of Pfizer make more sense (ie, just get fully vaccinated in the fall with Mrna?) ? If I got my first dose of Pfizer to be considered "Fully vaccinated in Canada" in July, would a third shot in November (second shot of PFizer) qualify me to be fully vaccinated, or would it not count because I waited too long in between shots?

I'm not worried about getting infected/sick. I'm more concerned about taking more needles than I have to. I'm just thinking a guy might be better off waiting till the fall/winter when we may travel internationally to deciding on what to get for my second shot. Perhaps the MRNA vaccines will have a booster at that time that may make it more worthwhile to get fully vaccinated with Pfizer or Moderna.


----------



## Beaver101

^ I think your (not just yours but moreso for flu-deniers) nightmare may have just started if you're more concerned about taking more needles than you have to because .... those boosters shots might be needed annually ... like flu-shots.


----------



## Bananatron

Beaver101 said:


> ^ I think your (not just yours but moreso for flu-deniers) nightmare may have just started if you're more concerned about taking more needles than you have to because .... those boosters shots might be needed annually ... like flu-shots.


No, you're misunderstanding my concerns.

Is there any danger in taking more vaccines than recommended, just to satisfy demands for global travel? ie) I don't think it would be advisable to take a shot of Pfizer once a month, or 2 shots of Pfizer immediately following 2 shots of AZ.


----------



## Beaver101

^ Okay, I read your post very quickly so in the context of what you were asking - I think it would be insane to take more than 2 shots of whatever you need in a span of a year ... particularly for travelling purpose. 

Now with the Americans not recognizing AZ, that'll be problematic for travelling there. But I'm sure our PM will have a discussion with the POTUS to come up with a solution. Let's start with what happens to Canadian-American-essential workers who got AZ?


----------



## Bananatron

Beaver101 said:


> ^ Okay, I read your post very quickly so in the context of what you were asking - I think it would be insane to take more than 2 shots of whatever you need in a span of a year ... particularly for travelling purpose. Now with the Americans are not recognizing AZ, that's problematic for travelling there. But I'm sure our PM will have a discussion with the POTUS to come up with a solution. Let's start with what happens to Canadian-American-vice-versa-essential workers who got AZ?


I mean its a Bruce Springsteen concert in New York State, of all the things I plan on doing with my life that isn't one of them, but it definitely is upsetting to hear that getting AZ could hamper our travel plans in the next few years.


----------



## Beaver101

Bananatron said:


> I mean its a Bruce Springsteen concert in New York State, of all the things I plan on doing with my life that isn't one of them, but *it definitely is upsetting to hear that getting AZ could hamper our travel plans in the next few years.*


 ... then it's so much for "re-opening" the Canadian economy that our (and not only ours) leaders want. Everyone (and I mean everyone on this planet) can't wait 1 extra day, let alone the next "few" years.


----------



## MrMatt

Just booked my followup shot.
Not too concerned about mixing AZ & mRNA


----------



## Spudd

gibor365 said:


> Do you remember when our dictators Trudeau, Ford, Hajdu, Elliot etc made a huge hype that they received 1st dose of AZ?! It was published everywhere around the World.... I tried to find out what they got for 2nd dose and there is absolutely NO ANY INFO!
> From the beginning , I posted that IMHO those were fake news and all our "so-called leaders" got AZ only for the cameras and long time before , they got both doses of Pfizer in proper 21 days interval.


They might not have had them yet. Ford got his first dose on April 9 so 12 weeks will be July 2. 

For Trudeau, there was an article posted on May 12 where he supported getting AZ for his second dose but it was clear he had not had the 2nd dose yet. He had his first dose on April 23, apparently, so he's behind Ford.








PM Trudeau says he plans to take second AstraZeneca shot, if it's available


After receiving his first shot in April, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says his doctor's latest advice to him is to take a second shot of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, should it be offered to him when the time comes.




www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## gibor365

Spudd said:


> They might not have had them yet. Ford got his first dose on April 9 so 12 weeks will be July 2.
> 
> For Trudeau, there was an article posted on May 12 where he supported getting AZ for his second dose but it was clear he had not had the 2nd dose yet. He had his first dose on April 23, apparently, so he's behind Ford.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PM Trudeau says he plans to take second AstraZeneca shot, if it's available
> 
> 
> After receiving his first shot in April, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says his doctor's latest advice to him is to take a second shot of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, should it be offered to him when the time comes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ctvnews.ca


My wife got AZ Apr 20 and scheduled to take 2nd shot (she selected Pfizer) this Monday..
From my research this article from May 12 is the only mention about Trudeau and his plans for 2nd shot  ... 
Otherwise , no any info... Now, I'm even more certain that All hype about 'bosses" getting AZ was a scam


----------



## Beaver101

Beaver101 said:


> ^ Okay, I read your post very quickly so in the context of what you were asking - I think it would be insane to take more than 2 shots of whatever you need in a span of a year ... particularly for travelling purpose.
> 
> Now with the Americans not recognizing AZ, that'll be problematic for travelling there. But I'm sure our PM will have a discussion with the POTUS to come up with a solution. Let's start with what happens to Canadian-American-essential workers who got AZ?


 ... for a worrying Bananatron: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/canada-vaccine-certification-passport-travel-justin-trudeau-171618905.html



> ... The prime minister also spoke about concerns around Canadians who received the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine not being allowed the same access to travel to or participate in events in the U.S., because it is not an FDA-authorized vaccine.
> 
> *Trudeau confirmed that the issue of different countries having a different list of approved vaccine has come up and the federal government is "engaged in discussions" with the U.S. and countries to "ensure that people who are protected from COVID-19 are able to travel."*
> 
> "We hope to be able to resolve those issues in the coming weeks, in time for...loosened restrictions around travel," the prime minister said.


----------



## Bananatron

Beaver101 said:


> ... for a worrying Bananatron: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/canada-vaccine-certification-passport-travel-justin-trudeau-171618905.html


Good, thanks for the info. I'd really like to stick with the original plan of 2 doses of AZ.


----------



## gibor365

> The emerging evidence suggesting better immune responses when a first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine is followed by a second dose of the Pfzier-BioNTech or Moderna mRNA vaccines," Dr. Theresa Tam, Canada's chief public health officer said at a press conference on Thursday


If zombie-like Tam said it , people should be concerned.........


----------



## andrewf

Money172375 said:


> Some delta info in Ontario. R(t) is 1.23….it will quickly takeover.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ontario Dashboard - Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table
> 
> 
> NOTICE: This website is no longer updated.If you have questions about previously published Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table resources, please email [email protected] Current Status in Ontario Contents Current Status in Ontario Current COVID-19 Risk in Ontario by Vaccination Status...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> covid19-sciencetable.ca


If it has R of 1.23, not only will it become dominant, we might get another wave. Hopefully vaccination can knock it back below 1.


----------



## MrMatt

andrewf said:


> If it has R of 1.23, not only will it become dominant, we might get another wave. Hopefully vaccination can knock it back below 1.


Well that's it, if vaccination reduces spready by 30%, you end up with an R slighlty under 1, and we're in good shape.
Remember our behaviour also dramatically impacts R values as well.


----------



## andrewf

MrMatt said:


> Well that's it, if vaccination reduces spready by 30%, you end up with an R slighlty under 1, and we're in good shape.
> Remember our behaviour also dramatically impacts R values as well.


Seems like rushing into Bacchanalia reopening is not a great idea. If we have a variant that is spreading at 1.23 R, it isn't exactly the right time to be massively relaxing distancing measures. That's a recipe for Wave 4.


----------



## damian13ster

Meh. R is 1.23 with restrictions.
It will be 1.23 with no restrictions.
Zero difference.
Get vaccinated with 2nd dose as soon as possible.
When it comes to AZ, I am curious what USA is going to do. It was never approved there. I know European Union considered person vaccinated only if the vaccine used was approved by EMA. Will US do the same or are people who were unlucky to get AZ considered as unvaccinated for travel/concert/other purposes?


----------



## james4beach

andrewf said:


> If it has R of 1.23, not only will it become dominant, we might get another wave. Hopefully vaccination can knock it back below 1.


Yeah, I thought the same thing. It's already guaranteed to become dominant, but we're not out of the woods for suppressing it. And remember, there will be other variants eventually.



andrewf said:


> Seems like rushing into Bacchanalia reopening is not a great idea. If we have a variant that is spreading at 1.23 R, it isn't exactly the right time to be massively relaxing distancing measures. That's a recipe for Wave 4.


I think a full reopening is a bad idea. People are, incorrectly, thinking that vaccination fully protects them and are already increasing their high-risk activities, letting go completely and doing everything they want.

This is exactly the kind of "extreme" behaviour which keeps landing us into emergency lockdown situations. We end up oscillating between extreme fear and absolutely zero fear. And we keep suffering for that too... it's not in the public's best interest, nor in the interest of businesses, nor is it fun for doctors and nurses who end up being pushed the brink with each wave.



damian13ster said:


> Meh. R is 1.23 with restrictions.
> It will be 1.23 with no restrictions.
> Zero difference.


Absolutely not. You don't understand how this works. The R factor depends a lot on the public behaviour (and immunity). The way we act has a big impact on how the disease can spread. It's just plain reckless to let down all our guards, act like nothing is happening, and let the disease take its natural course.


----------



## Bananatron

james4beach said:


> Yeah, I thought the same thing. It's already guaranteed to become dominant, but we're not out of the woods for suppressing it. And remember, there will be other variants eventually.
> 
> 
> 
> I think a full reopening is a bad idea. People are, incorrectly, thinking that vaccination fully protects them and are already increasing their high-risk activities, letting go completely and doing everything they want.
> 
> This is exactly the kind of "extreme" behaviour which keeps landing us into emergency lockdown situations. We end up oscillating between extreme fear and absolutely zero fear. And we keep suffering for that too... it's not in the public's best interest, nor in the interest of businesses, nor is it fun for doctors and nurses who end up being pushed the brink with each wave.
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely not. You don't understand how this works. The R factor depends a lot on the public behaviour (and immunity). The way we act has a big impact on how the disease can spread. It's just plain reckless to let down all our guards, act like nothing is happening, and let the disease take its natural course.


I'm just curious how you think we should proceed. By this time, everyone who wants the protection of a vaccine has had at least their first dose and either has had their second as well or is scheduled for it in the next month. 

Those that are lower on the vaccine second dose priority list have such a high level of natural immunity that the first dose for them is probably more effective than a second dose was for a boomer.

What should be our trigger to reopen? Should we all be held hostage by the vaccine hesitant?

If it's not safe to return to normal once vaccines have been administered, will it ever be safe? 

These are honest questions, I would appreciate a reply on a sensible way to reopen, and how we should handle the inevitable outbreak "pockets" that are sure to happen in unvaccinated communities.


----------



## Beaver101

^ Just adding my 2c to your question before J4B answers:



> ... If it's not safe to return to normal once vaccines have been administered, will it ever be safe?


 ... never. You can call me paranoid but as far as I'm concerned this Covid thing really opened my eyes on the spread of the "annual flu", even it's less deadlier. 

As mentioned numerous times on this board, I don't want your cooties just as you don't want mines so I'll take whatever necessary precautions to keep it that way.


----------



## Bananatron

Beaver101 said:


> ^ Just adding my 2c to your question before J4B answers:
> 
> ... never. You can call me paranoid but as far as I'm concerned this Covid thing really opened my eyes on the spread of the "annual flu", even it's less deadlier.
> 
> As mentioned numerous times on this board, I don't want your cooties just as you don't want mines so I'll take whatever necessary precautions to keep it that way.


There is a difference between feeling unsafe and taking precautions to protect yourself and thinking we should have government imposed restrictions placed on us indefinitely.

If the vaccines are available for those that want the protection of them, and our healthcare systems can return to normal operation, we must return to normal, yes?


----------



## Beaver101

Bananatron said:


> There is a difference between feeling unsafe and taking precautions to protect yourself and thinking we should have government imposed restrictions placed on us indefinitely.


 ... yes, and there's also a difference of those who think the government is 1. imposing restrictions unnecessarily on us (meaning "everyone", and not just those who think they're the only ones on this planet with "rights", particularly those who think they've "moral" rights to refuse to comply with lockdowns, mask wearing, restrictions, etc.), and 2. that these rights-suppressed-restrictions are indefinite.



> If the vaccines are available for those that want the protection of them, and our healthcare systems can return to normal operation, we must return to normal, yes?


... define "normal" ... for one, our healthcare systems (Ontario, not sure on other provinces/elsewhere) has a backlog of 3.5 years of non-elective surgery even one is vaccinated. Would that be considered normal? Also, if new variants come up and we don't have updated vaccines, can our health systems return to normal? How about a simpler analogy: Even we're fully vaccinated, when do you think we can visit our doctor without wearing a mask? A year or ?

Bottomline: I dislike these impositions just as much as you do but understand why the government had/has to do what it has to do, whether to impose lockdowns, restrictions, quarantines - these sacrifices were made to protect ALL its citizens, the healthcare systems, economy, etc.


----------



## damian13ster

For example lower number of ICUs in 2020 than in any other year since 2015.
Also, your statement of 'absolutely not' is science-denying.
Science shows any restrictions introduced after May 2020 were useless for public health and harmful in all other aspects. You can disagree with me all you want, but don't deny the science.

In the meantime,








Questions raised about future of travel after AstraZeneca vaccine not accepted at U.S. concert


Canada’s vaccination rate for first doses ranks among the top of the world’s largest countries, and second doses are now accelerating as well.




vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca




AstraZeneca not accepted at US concert with mandatory vaccinations.


----------



## Beaver101

^ Huh? When was vaccinations considered mandatory? in Canada and/USA?


----------



## Bananatron

Beaver101 said:


> ... yes, and there's also a difference of those who think the government is 1. imposing restrictions unnecessarily on us (meaning "everyone", and not just those who think they're the only ones on this planet with "rights", particularly those who think they've "moral" rights to refuse to comply with lockdowns, mask wearing, restrictions, etc.), and 2. that these rights-suppressed-restrictions are indefinite.
> 
> ... define "normal" ... for one, our healthcare systems (Ontario, not sure on other provinces/elsewhere) has a backlog of 3.5 years of non-elective surgery even one is vaccinated. Would that be considered normal?
> 
> Bottomline: I dislike these impositions just as much as you do but understand why the government had/has to do what it has to do, whether to impose lockdowns, restrictions, quarantines - these sacrifices were made to protect ALL its citizens, the healthcare systems, economy, etc.


You're mistaking me for someone who didn't understand the reasons for the restrictions. 

What I don't understand is the reasoning to continue them now. A question you seem to be avoiding.


----------



## Beaver101

^


Bananatron said:


> You're mistaking me for someone who didn't understand the reasons for the restrictions.
> 
> What I don't understand is the reasoning to continue them now. A question you seem to be avoiding.


 ... no, I'm not avoiding it. The answer is within your statement "what I don't understand ... ".

Here's some help to answer that question - is the pandemic over? Let's make it easier - is the epidemic (officially that's) over for Ontario (or name your province), Canada?


----------



## Bananatron

Beaver101 said:


> ^
> ... no, I'm not avoiding it. The answer is within your statement "what I don't understand ... ".
> 
> Here's some help to answer that question - is the pandemic over?


Is the pandemic over, in that we'll never have to worry about coronavirus again? No. 

Are the reasons why the pandemic forced global restrictions over in Canada? Yes. 

No more vulnerable populations
Greatly reduced deaths
Nobody catching it who doesn't want it
Reduced hospital loads

So again, I ask: what are the reasons to continue the restrictions?


----------



## Beaver101

^ Better to be safe than sorry? Abundance of caution? or how about can you "guarantee" that there won't be a 4th wave? The government can't so they'll continue with the "restrictions" as much as they bother some folks. They're being lifted as things improve ... just have to wait and see. There is light at the tunnel.

Besides the government makes the rules/laws, not much you can do about them except to either break or b1tch about them or comply. Yours/everyone's choice.

PS: Strongly disagree with"_Nobody catching it who doesn't want it_"... some people will catch it no matter how much they don't want it, if they don't take the necessary precautions. And even they do, there is still a possibility of catching it. There have been incidents (as reported) that fully vaccinated people caught Covid. So how do you explain that? Vaccination is not a silver-bullet. And neither restrictions, mask wearing, etc.


----------



## MrMatt

james4beach said:


> Are the reasons why the pandemic forced global restrictions over in Canada? Yes.


Right now, looks that way.



> So again, I ask: what are the reasons to continue the restrictions?


I think we have to be ready to do more, masks for a while is likely a good idea.

Honestly as long as we get the ICU/hospital load down low enough we can do all the other procedures we've delayed and catch up, I don't think restrictions matter.

With 70% vaccinated to 1 shot, and lots of the most vulnerable with both shots, the death rate going forward should be below the seasonal flu, and it's time to back off.

That being said, if Delta or another strain goes nuts and starts overloading hospitals, reintroducing restrictions make sense.


Ontario tried to be more responsive, and people called them flip floppers, now they made a firm clear plan, based on objective numbers, and people are complaining that they're not being responsive. 
I think that shows how impossible it is to make people happy.


----------



## MrMatt

Beaver101 said:


> ^ Better to be safe than sorry? Abundance of caution? or how about can you "guarantee" that there won't be a 4th wave? The government can't so they'll continue with the "restrictions" as much as they bother you. They're being lifted as things improve ... just have to wait and see. There is light at the tunnel.
> 
> Besides the government makes the rules/laws, not much you can do about them except to either break or b1tch about them. Yours/everyone's choice.


London had 3 new cases yesterday, that's less than 1 in 100k. 
The last wave is over here, time to open up.


----------



## damian13ster

Beaver101 said:


> ^ Huh? When was vaccinations considered mandatory? in Canada and/USA?


Mandatory for the concert. There is literally a link in the very post you are replying to. The answer is all in there.
Looks like in some part of the world those with AstraZeneca will also be considered second class citizens

Completely illegal considering one can't promote, coerce, or mandate vaccines that only have emergency use authorization, but prosecutors turn a blind eye.


----------



## Beaver101

MrMatt said:


> London had 3 new cases yesterday, that's less than 1 in 100k.
> The last wave is over here, time to open up.


 ... refresh your memory " all it takes is 1 (aka "one)) infection" to start a spread.

PS: Your post 433, the quote belongs to Bananatron, not J4B.


----------



## Beaver101

damian13ster said:


> Mandatory for the concert. There is literally a link in the very post you are replying to. The answer is all in there.


 ... sorry you're right there. But your post made it sound like it's vaccinations are mandatory nationwide.



> Looks like in some part of the world those with AstraZeneca will also be considered second class citizens


 ... let's start with Britain. Do you think the British will be happy to be considered world's "2nd" class citizens? I think not.



> Completely illegal considering one can't promote, coerce, or mandate vaccines that only have emergency use authorization, but prosecutors turn a blind eye.


 ... you might ask why is it that? You might also ask the question "can my employer fire me for not being vaccinated"?


----------



## damian13ster

Beaver101 said:


> ... sorry you're right there. But your post made it sound like it's vaccinations are mandatory nationwide.
> 
> ... let's start with Britain. Do you think the British will be happy to be considered world's "2nd" class citizens? I think not.
> 
> ... you might ask why is it that? You might also ask the question "can my employer fire me for not being vaccinated"?


I don't think they will be happy. Nor do I think Canadians who got it will be happy.
You think the organizers of the concert didn't know about that?
I am sure in couple of months everyone will forget about vaccine passports, mandates, etc. and it will become like a seasonal flu shot that some people will get, others will not, and life will go on. But for this summer it looks like people who got AZ will be screwed when it comes to activities in the US. Luckily Europe is happy to get those tourism money!
In the meantime, Canadian government still can't come up with a system proving vaccination. Now they are aiming for the fall to have it ready. Not like we could have predicted 16 months ago that it will be an issue and get it figured out......

Well, the law was introduced to protect from coercion into getting medicinal product that didn't go through scrutiny of full process necessary for full approval.
Why is it ignored? Because there aren't consequences for those who ignore it.
And no, the employer can't fire you (by law) while vaccine is still not fully approved.
Vaccines can be mandated after they have received full authorization, so after that I believe they can do it.


----------



## Beaver101

MrMatt said:


> ...
> 
> Ontario tried to be more responsive, and people called them flip floppers, now they made a firm clear plan, based on objective numbers, and people are complaining that they're not being responsive.
> I think that shows how impossible it is to make people happy.


 ... who are you referring to calling the pandemic crisis handler flip-floppers? Please clarify.

If you're referring to me (and I'm not taking this personally), I stand by my opinion the Ontario's Education Minister is a flip-flopper, since last year with his role in the pandemic. [And flip-flopper would be considered a polite term. Though inepted is better suited. ] 

As for Ontario Health Minister, there is still room for improvement.

As for the Premier, I was impressed with his performance and gave him credit. Now with his recent call-back of his 'resigned" Finance Minister, I'm not so sure of that anymore.

Let's not derail this thread to politics. EOM.


----------



## Beaver101

damian13ster said:


> I don't think they will be happy. Nor do I think Canadians who got it will be happy.
> You think the organizers of the concert didn't know about that?


 ... it's good that they "know" about that and they carry enough liability insurance. USA is a litigation-happy place.



> I am sure in couple of months everyone will forget about vaccine passports, mandates, etc. and it will become like a seasonal flu shot that some people will get, others will not, and life will go on.


 ... life will go on. But I don't think people (or everyone) will just "forget" about passports, mandates, etc. The annual flu will remind people even with the lowest memory-cells count.



> But for this summer it looks like people who got AZ will be screwed when it comes to activities in the US. Luckily Europe is happy to get those tourism money!


 ... why would AZ-vaccinated people, if any, in the "USA" be screwed? Since you noted AZ wasn't even approved in the USA so how many AZ vaccinated people do you stats here? So lucky Europe gets the tourism money, all the more power to them. And if there're outbreaks/resurrections/surges, oh well ... dollars trumps life.



> In the meantime, Canadian government still can't come up with a system proving vaccination. Now they are aiming for the fall to have it ready. Not like we could have predicted 16 months ago that it will be an issue and get it figured out......


 ... hey, this is Canada and it's not like you don't know how it works/worked.


> Well, the law was introduced to protect from coercion into getting medicinal product that didn't go through scrutiny of full process necessary for full approval.
> Why is it ignored? Because there aren't consequences for those who ignore it.


 ... not following you here.



> And no, the employer can't fire you (by law) while vaccine is still not fully approved.


 ... what vaccine not approved? in Canada? or the USA? Again, which Americans do you know of that got AZ - non approved vaccine there?

No, the employer can't fire you if you're un-vaccinated. However, your employer can tell you - don't bother coming back to work where your presence is required, if you are unvaccinated. And this is in the USA. I don't think Canada will be much behind. Recent news eg. students of Ryerson U must be fully vaccinated if they are take up residents there. LTC workers who refuse to be (fully) vaccinated will be sent for further education ... meaning what? I think you get it.



> Vaccines can be mandated after they have received full authorization, so after that I believe they can do it.


 ... Canada or the USA?


----------



## Bananatron

You guys hear about this?

4 British airways pilots dead shortly after their second dose. Unrelated to the vaccine, of course.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1405612956533002243
We know, of course, that the clotting issue couldn't possibly be made worse by mixing vaccine technologies, right? With all of the extensive data they have before they approved it?

I'll probably be staying away from planes for a bit. Might stay away from my second dose for a bit too.


----------



## Bananatron

As for the denial of AZ folks to buy Springsteen tickets, I wouldn't worry too much about what some pretentious concert organizers in a pretentious state do in the early days. I almost wonder if it could be considered a form of discrimination.


----------



## gibor365

damian13ster said:


> Mandatory for the concert. There is literally a link in the very post you are replying to. The answer is all in there.
> *Looks like in some part of the world those with AstraZeneca will also be considered second class citizens*
> 
> Completely illegal considering one can't promote, coerce, or mandate vaccines that only have emergency use authorization, but prosecutors turn a blind eye.


Exactly what I posted when AZ arrived to Canada and I decided to skip it and wait for Pfizer. I wouldn't be surprised if AZ vaccinated people won't be allowed to enter States.
And naïve Canadians who mixed AZ and Pfizer maybe not be counted fully vaccinated for international travel....


----------



## gibor365

MrMatt said:


> London had 3 new cases yesterday, that's less than 1 in 100k.
> The last wave is over here, time to open up.


The time to open up was a long time ago.... but our dictators enjoy keeping us lockdown
_On Friday, Ontario passed the threshold to move into Step 2 as 75 per cent of eligible residents received their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and 20 per cent are now considered fully vaccinated after receiving both a first and second shot.
However, *the province's top doctor said he would only consider speeding up next stage of the reopening process by "a day or two.*" 
Ontario is set to enter *Step 2 -- which allows for indoor gatherings of up to five people and outdoor gatherings of 25 people* -- on July 2 at the earliest._

What a jokers!!!! 5 people indoor, 25 outdoor from July 2?! Just curious if there are still idiots who follow those ridiculous rules LOL


----------



## gibor365

Bananatron said:


> Is the pandemic over, in that we'll never have to worry about coronavirus again? No.
> 
> Are the reasons why the pandemic forced global restrictions over in Canada? Yes.
> 
> No more vulnerable populations
> Greatly reduced deaths
> Nobody catching it who doesn't want it
> Reduced hospital loads
> 
> So again, I ask: *what are the reasons to continue the restrictions?*


There are no ANY reasons, but dictatorships don't need any reason to lockdown people!


----------



## Money172375

The WHO has approved AZ and the US will fall in line and accept visitors who had AZ…unless they want to alienate millions of tourists
Time to look for the next issue to be angry about.


----------



## damian13ster

US doesn't require vaccination for entry at all. You can book a ticket to US and fly there tomorrow, vaccinated or not.
They accept visitors. 
The issue arose for certain activities, not for policy regarding borders.


----------



## james4beach

Bananatron said:


> Those that are lower on the vaccine second dose priority list have such a high level of natural immunity that the first dose for them is probably more effective than a second dose was for a boomer.


My broader point is that vaccines are not a panacea. They are a tool to help control the pandemic, it's not true that the pandemic ends once enough people have two vaccinations.



Bananatron said:


> What should be our trigger to reopen? Should we all be held hostage by the vaccine hesitant?


The pandemic is over when the death and critical illness rates plummet, *and stays down for long enough* that we can be certain its due to high enough levels of immunity (natural + vaccination), and to be certain that new mutant variants aren't evading the immunity.

At the moment, we just came off a brutal winter wave. The rates have plummeted, which is good. But we really have to wait it out a bit before getting overconfident. It's too early to call it done, mainly because we don't know if variants will be contained by the vaccination.

IMO the correct thing to do would be to continue to discourage large gathering, discourage the highest risk social contact (packed indoor places) and encourage ongoing mask use.



Bananatron said:


> If it's not safe to return to normal once vaccines have been administered, will it ever be safe?


Of course it eventually will. Eventually there will be enough people with immunity to slow the spread to a crawl, including to new variants.

Currently however we don't know if the population's immunity (including with vaccination) is good enough to prevent variants from spreading. Personally I suspect it is ... I think we're likely in the clear ... BUT a scientific approach would be to wait longer until we are convinced by the data.


----------



## Bananatron

Money172375 said:


> The WHO has approved AZ and the US will fall in line and accept visitors who had AZ…unless they want to alienate millions of tourists
> Time to look for the next issue to be angry about.


And for the unique canadian hybrids, with one of each?

Honestly I imagine an agreement between countries to honor their respective vaccination passports


----------



## james4beach

Bananatron said:


> You guys hear about this?


Twitter is an unreliable source. These are just sensationalist stories that are passed around on social media.

Reuters has looked into it and says four BA pilots have died recently, but it's not related to vaccination.


----------



## Beaver101

Money172375 said:


> The WHO has approved AZ and the US will fall in line and accept visitors who had AZ…unless they want to alienate millions of tourists
> Time to look for the next issue to be angry about.


 ... as confirmed by the following good news for hard-core Springsteen's fans:

'Springsteen on Broadway' clears way for AstraZeneca recipients to attend show



damian13ster said:


> US doesn't require vaccination for entry at all. You can book a ticket to US and fly there tomorrow, vaccinated or not.
> They accept visitors.
> The issue arose for certain activities, not for policy regarding borders.


 ... and within the above link it says:



> _... “Springsteen on Broadway” wasn't the only form of entertainment barred to AstraZeneca recipients. Other New York attractions, including “Saturday Night Live” and “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon,” still say those who received the shots cannot attend live tapings.
> 
> *Canada and the United States extended restrictions on non-essential travel on Friday, keeping the border between the countries closed until at least July 21.*
> 
> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said 75 per cent of Canadians would need to receive a first vaccine dose and 20 per cent would need to be fully immunized with two before rules can be loosened, thresholds the country crossed on Saturday.
> 
> More details on rules for vaccinated Canadians and permanent residents are scheduled to be unveiled on Monday.
> 
> *Trudeau said the government plans to have Canadians upload proof of vaccination pictures to the ArriveCan app so border agents can verify someone is fully vaccinated when travelling this summer.
> 
> For the fall, Trudeau said federal officials are working with provinces to automatically share vaccination status, which could then be accepted around the world.
> 
> He also said the government is working with other countries on ensuring travellers who receive vaccines not approved in their destination countries are still able to enter safely.*_


----------



## andrewf

Bananatron said:


> Nobody catching it who doesn't want it


This is just wrong. Vaccine doesn't make you impervious to infection.


----------



## andrewf

damian13ster said:


> US doesn't require vaccination for entry at all. You can book a ticket to US and fly there tomorrow, vaccinated or not.
> They accept visitors.
> The issue arose for certain activities, not for policy regarding borders.


My coworker is stuck in India, and can't fly via US.


----------



## Bananatron

andrewf said:


> This is just wrong. Vaccine doesn't make you impervious to infection.


Can we assume that everyone that is participating in these conversations already know these nit-picky details?

Vaccines are nearly 100% effective in preventing serious effects from the virus, that is, hospitalizations and or death. 

Notice I said nearly. Nearly 100%.


----------



## MrMatt

Bananatron said:


> Can we assume that everyone that is participating in these conversations already know these nit-picky details?
> 
> Vaccines are nearly 100% effective in preventing serious effects from the virus, that is, hospitalizations and or death.
> 
> Notice I said nearly. Nearly 100%.


Yes, but there is a different between catching and spreading COVID and dying from COVID.
We shouldn't mix up one for another.

Also if everyone, or even a substantial portion of Canadians got COVID today, even with vaccination, we'd likely fill our hospitals. That's the problem with spread.

I expect vaccinated people spread less, but it's could still be a concern.
Remember those hospital cases turn into deaths quickly once the hospitals are full


----------

