COVID-19 III: No Politics For Thee

[Big Beat Steve]

4 hours ago, sidewinder said:

There does seem to be a lot of irrational group think misinformation festering there, which is having a very adverse impact on their vaccination programme. Quite a percentage of idiots are also going for a complete opt out - totally ludicrous and sadly, at a cost of lost lives.

It's not as clear as that, and rash comments are totally uncalled for.
Disregarding the "opt out" percentage of persons (which I guess exists in any country and which you really can only hope will sort out themselves over time), AZ has not exactly endeared themselves to the public in Continental Europe firstly because they unilaterally cut down contractually agreed deliveries in the early phase of their delivery schedule earlier this year (whereas the UK was supplied in full), which is about as bad a way to build up trust as it can possibly be. This has not just upset attempted schedules in the early vaccination phase (as it added to the cutback of Biontech supplies due to a rebuild of a major production plant) but also caused severe irritations and frustration among the political deciders in the EU, up to publicly voiced complaints that AZ had "taken the EU for a ride". Add to this the undeniable fact that the effectiveness rates of the AZ vaccine ARE lower than those of Biontech and Moderna (plus likely way substandard communication policy by AZ themselves) and you are in for a bad start.

And then, following medical advice, several EU countries decided not to administer the AZ vaccine to persons over 65 - due to insufficient evidence of its effectiveness based on the EU approval info submitted by AZ. This does contrast sharply with that the Grauniad claims in its statement about the alleded peredomiance of elderly cohorts tested by AZ. So which is which? Is this another way to build up trust, I ask you?

No doubt the vaccination program rollout in Germany so far is not what it ought to be and so far has been too slow in gathering momentum, but it really does NOT help if you see the meandering in the communications of the politicians that first were forthright in the differences of effectiveness and then switched to all sorts of contortions in their "argumentations" that AZ all of a sudden was oh so good which reeked very much of "you gotta make do with what we got" (but where do the Biontech and Moderna supplies go, one wonders?).  Add to this that, of all groups of the population, the medical personnel (part of stage 2 candiates following the over-80 ones, retirement homes etc. which made up stage 1 and are largely taken care of by now if you believe the press statements) have now AGAIN been singled out for the AZ vaccine. Of all groups ... those working the medical field, at the forefront of the risk exposure, often unknowingly and untraceably in contact with irresponsible patients seeking out the doctors DESPITE the fact that they ought not to in thier condition, etc.? And there ARE concerns about the functioning principle of the AZ vaccine which differs fundamentally from that of Biontech and Moderna and it can only be hoped for that there are no side effects, not even long-term ones (which do matter to members of the medical professions because many are in the younger age groups). Note that even experts state that the risk is "very low", not that it has been proven through comphenensive testing that by all humanly possible yardsticks there is none. I'd wager a statement that many among the medical profession aren't irrational as you insinuate but just are aware of potential implications of this "technical side" of the vaccines and therefore ARE concerned.  They are just plain worried. So don't you at least understand that they are less than pleased or wary of what the deciders want to shove down their veins, come what may?

And at the risk of getting political (but this entire subject IS political and has been so for a very long time, let's face it ...), dig this quote form the Grauniad:

"Asked whether she would volunteer to be administered with the vaccine, Merkel said: “I am 66 years old and I do not belong to the recommended group for AstraZeneca.”  Similar tones came from Steinmeier, our president who the other day publicly said he had no understanding for those choosy about the vacine brand. Adding that "of course he and his wife would have themselves vacinated." What he did not say, though, that they were going to get the AZ vaccine. Fine way of reasoning, "I'm above the age bracket and hey, give me the better stuff!" As if 66 or 65 (cf. the "cutoff date") by itself made a significant difference, particularly since the AZ vacine seems to be OK for senior citizens in the UK and the medical experts cannot be all dumb there either? And then talk about role models to entice people to get vaccinated (as has been advocated only recently, .e.g. in certain ethnic groups of the population, e.g. the UK, isn't it, Sidewinder?). In short, our leaders are just plain chickening out. Not the ideal way to build up trust either.

Add to this case-based evidence (read a couple of my earler posts) and the picture just IS not all clear. I had a talk about this last night with my better half - she works in the medical field - at a dentist - and is therefore among those at the forefront of aerosol exposure, despite protective gear which LITERALLY is a burden for them. Hence her hesitations, and of course she gets feedback from colleagues or patients who work in other fields of the medical profession. And you know what? She has had feedback from about 15 persons in recent days who had been vaccinated with AZ. And virtually every one of them had had severe side effects which went well beyond the usual pain at the point of injection in your arm and had them feel weak or even sidelined for days. Virtually everyone! And most of them were in the younger age bracket, which seems to be indicating there is a problem there too, not (just) among the over-65s.
These stronger and more frequent side effects were noticed elsewhere too, but all of a sudden the media and politicans tell us "oh those side effects are good because they show the body reacts to the vaccine and builds up antibodies". So by inference any other vaccine that the patient supports well without side effects (which elsewhere is often touted to be the ideal case) is useless or at least less effective? Which is which then, and when? Is it surprising that some feel that the reasoning is changed at anyone's whim?

This evidence may be anecdotical but as the number of these anecdotical evidences increases it adds up to a picture. 
I told her what a colleague of mine from Gloucestershire told me the other day about her husband (past 70). He had been given his AZ shot recently and did not have any side effects. She was interested and sort of relieved to hear that not all is bad news.

We all are hoping for the best and would rather believe good news but still the overall picture is that trust-building measures are low, communication is a disaster, role models among the leaders are inexistent and too many feel they are left to themselves and are not given the respectful treatment they earn (e.g. the medial profession who IMHO, for example, have every right to be given the very best and most effective vaccine available).

Nuff said in this rant ...

Edited February 26, 2021 by Big Beat Steve

[Dan Gould]

1 hour ago, Big Beat Steve said:

It's not as clear as that, and rash comments are totally uncalled for.
Disregarding the "opt out" percentage of persons (which I guess exists in any country and which you really can only hope will sort out themselves over time), AZ has not exactly endeared themselves to the public in Continental Europe firstly because they unilaterally cut down contractually agreed deliveries in the early phase of their delivery schedule earlier this year (whereas the UK was supplied in full), which is about as bad a way to build up trust as it can possibly be. This has not just upset attempted schedules in the early vaccination phase (as it added to the cutback of Biontech supplies due to a rebuild of a major production plant) but also caused severe irritations and frustration among the political deciders in the EU, up to publicly voiced complaints that AZ had "taken the EU for a ride". Add to this the undeniable fact that the effectiveness rates of the AZ vaccine ARE lower than those of Biontech and Moderna (plus likely way substandard communication policy by AZ themselves) and you are in for a bad start.

And then, following medical advice, several EU countries decided not to administer the AZ vaccine to persons over 65 - due to insufficient evidence of its effectiveness based on the EU approval info submitted by AZ. This does contrast sharply with that the Grauniad claims in its statement about the alleded peredomiance of elderly cohorts tested by AZ. So which is which? Is this another way to build up trust, I ask you?

No doubt the vaccination program rollout in Germany so far is not what it ought to be and so far has been too slow in gathering momentum, but it really does NOT help if you see the meandering in the communications of the politicians that first were forthright in the differences of effectiveness and then switched to all sorts of contortions in their "argumentations" that AZ all of a sudden was oh so good which reeked very much of "you gotta make do with what we got" (but where do the Biontech and Moderna supplies go, one wonders?).  Add to this that, of all groups of the population, the medical personnel (part of stage 2 candiates following the over-80 ones, retirement homes etc. which made up stage 1 and are largely taken care of by now if you believe the press statements) have now AGAIN been singled out for the AZ vaccine. Of all groups ... those working the medical field, at the forefront of the risk exposure, often unknowingly and untraceably in contact with irresponsible patients seeking out the doctors DESPITE the fact that they ought not to in thier condition, etc.? And there ARE concerns about the functioning principle of the AZ vaccine which differs fundamentally from that of Biontech and Moderna and it can only be hoped for that there are no side effects, not even long-term ones (which do matter to members of the medical professions because many are in the younger age groups). Note that even experts state that the risk is "very low", not that it has been proven through comphenensive testing that by all humanly possible yardsticks there is none. I'd wager a statement that many among the medical profession aren't irrational as you insinuate but just are aware of potential implications of this "technical side" of the vaccines and therefore ARE concerned.  They are just plain worried. So don't you at least understand that they are less than pleased or wary of what the deciders want to shove down their veins, come what may?

And at the risk of getting political (but this entire subject IS political and has been so for a very long time, let's face it ...), dig this quote form the Grauniad:

"Asked whether she would volunteer to be administered with the vaccine, Merkel said: “I am 66 years old and I do not belong to the recommended group for AstraZeneca.”  Similar tones came from Steinmeier, our president who the other day publicly said he had no understanding for those choosy about the vacine brand. Adding that "of course he and his wife would have themselves vacinated." What he did not say, though, that they were going to get the AZ vaccine. Fine way of reasoning, "I'm above the age bracket and hey, give me the better stuff!" As if 66 or 65 (cf. the "cutoff date") by itself made a significant difference, particularly since the AZ vacine seems to be OK for senior citizens in the UK and the medical experts cannot be all dumb there either? And then talk about role models to entice people to get vaccinated (as has been advocated only recently, .e.g. in certain ethnic groups of the population, e.g. the UK, isn't it, Sidewinder?). In short, our leaders are just plain chickening out. Not the ideal way to build up trust either.

Add to this case-based evidence (read a couple of my earler posts) and the picture just IS not all clear. I had a talk about this last night with my better half - she works in the medical field - at a dentist - and is therefore among those at the forefront of aerosol exposure, despite protective gear which LITERALLY is a burden for them. Hence her hesitations, and of course she gets feedback from colleagues or patients who work in other fields of the medical profession. And you know what? She has had feedback from about 15 persons in recent days who had been vaccinated with AZ. And virtually every one of them had had severe side effects which went well beyond the usual pain at the point of injection in your arm and had them feel weak or even sidelined for days. Virtually everyone! And most of them were in the younger age bracket, which seems to be indicating there is a problem there too, not (just) among the over-65s.
These stronger and more frequent side effects were noticed elsewhere too, but all of a sudden the media and politicans tell us "oh those side effects are good because they show the body reacts to the vaccine and builds up antibodies". So by inference any other vaccine that the patient supports well without side effects (which elsewhere is often touted to be the ideal case) is useless or at least less effective? Which is which then, and when? Is it surprising that some feel that the reasoning is changed at anyone's whim?

This evidence may be anecdotical but as the number of these anecdotical evidences increases it adds up to a picture. 
I told her what a colleague of mine from Gloucestershire told me the other day about her husband (past 70). He had been given his AZ shot recently and did not have any side effects. She was interested and sort of relieved to hear that not all is bad news.

We all are hoping for the best and would rather believe good news but still the overall picture is that trust-building measures are low, communication is a disaster, role models among the leaders are inexistent and too many feel they are left to themselves and are not given the respectful treatment they earn (e.g. the medial profession who IMHO, for example, have every right to be given the very best and most effective vaccine available).

Nuff said in this rant ...

Steve,

Where did anyone in authority come up with the idea that a vaccine must be proven effective specifically for people over 65?

I'll cop to not knowing as much about AZ and essentially nothing about vaccinations in the EU other than that it continues to be a shit-show for efficiency or effectiveness.

But here in the US the approach is: It works? Get it out to the public. There are greater risks that you will end up hospitalized or dead as age increases, so the elderly and certain other favored groups are getting them first.

Israel is jabbing every body they can, and now hospitalizations are more common among the YOUNG than among the OLD.

A few days of tiredness or flu symptoms is hardly surprising, nor should it (IMHO) make people hesitate. Look at the comments among the members here who have recently had a second shot of whatever. That's actually proof that it works, it's priming the pump of the immune system to be a hard-ass bitch against this stuff.

And last but not least, the goal of immunization is to reduce severe cases and death. And I believe every single one of these vaccines do that, in spades. 500,000 immunized and like, 20 hospitalizations, no deaths? Why would anyone not want those odds?

[Brad]

4 hours ago, sidewinder said:

There does seem to be a lot of irrational group think misinformation festering there, which is having a very adverse impact on their vaccination programme. Quite a percentage of idiots are also going for a complete opt out - totally ludicrous and sadly, at a cost of lost lives.

Any protection is better than none. 

[Big Beat Steve]

@Dan Gould:  
I agree about the question(ability) of proven specific effectiveness of over 65s. But don't tell me. Be puzzled about the way of communication in the EU instead. And ask yourself if what you said would not rather make the case for Merkel and Steinmeier BECOMING role models with the AZ vaccine, for example.
What I find to be cause for concern is the zigzagging of the statements in the media (by the leaders, their orgnizations or anybody else feeling qualified to make a statement). Unfortunately this just does not build up trust.

As for your other statements ...

"It works? Get it out to the public. There are greater risks that you will end up hospitalized or dead as age increases, so the elderly and certain other favored groups are getting them first "
Not that I would disagree with the basic premise but the gist of what I understood about the working principle of the AZ vaccine is that it may have more incalculable side effects on the human body than the totally different principle of the Biontech and Moderna vaccines. Side effects that experts are cautious not to rule out totally but relativize to being a "very small risk". Because they know that more definitive statements would have needed more long-term trials. I am not too surprised that some (particularly in the medical professions) are concerned because of this. Because the way I understood this (though I may have overlooked something) the only prior vaccines working on the AZ principle actually in use had been used for local epidemics in Africa on a (comparably) exceedingly small cohort of patients, i.e. not comparable at all. 
As for the "certain other favored groups", I still feel those "other favored grups" ought to include all medical workers - with the BEST vaccine available (there MUST be supplies of Biontech and Moderna after all). They deserve it more than many in far-removed office jobs.  

"That's actually proof that it works, it's priming the pump of the immune system to be a hard-ass bitch against this stuff."
I know you are quoting what others say, and looking at it in an isolated way I understand this line of reasoning and would not object. But - again - what about the other vaccines (not necessarily Corona-related), then, that have PROVEN to be effective without any sizable number of patients suffering severe side effects after vaccination? Now are they less good than AZ that apaprently often hits you in the head to show its effectiveness? Again - which way is it supposed to be? At best this reasoning is inconsistent, at worst I am afraid it - again - in the view of many in the PUBLIC boils down to a question of "The better (being vaccinated with hardly any side effects) is the enemy of the good (being vaccinated with a more definite risk of side effects)."
In fact there is another aspect in this. Are any antibody tests being done prior to vaccination? In the US? Elsewhere? I know here they usually aren't. What if these severe reactions are the result of antibodies already present in the body that would then result in a severe antibody overshoot (with corresponding reactions) if a vacination were to be added on top of this. There are indices that this might be an aspect to consider.

As for Israel, I marvel at the way they ORGANIZE this at speed. Maybe the fact that they live in a permanent state of semi-war alert helps getting large-scale actions like that rolled out fast and effectively. But even disregarding the near-war alert state other countries certainly can take a lesson. And if you ever wonder about the oh so great organizational efficiency of Germany (that no doubt was real for a very long time), don't believe a word! At least not in its current state. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Big Beat Steve

[Kevin Bresnahan]

1 hour ago, Dan Gould said:

Israel is jabbing every body they can, and now hospitalizations are more common among the YOUNG than among the OLD.

Unless they are a Palestinian living there...

[JSngry]

I think we can all use a $60 (payable in 4 interest-free installments!) personalized message from Tia Carrere to help us stay strong until we can get through this pandemic!

https://www.cameo.com/tiacarrere

[Dan Gould]

 

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

I think we can all use a $60 (payable in 4 interest-free installments!) personalized message from Tia Carrere to help us stay strong until we can get through this pandemic!

https://www.cameo.com/tiacarrere

I felt I had to click on that link just out of curiosity of what she looks like nowadays - assuming that photo is relatively current. 

SCHWINGG!

[JSngry]

That's not what surprised me. What surprised me was that there are a LOT of "celebrities" doing that Cameo thing. At $60 (payable in 4 interest-free installments!) , Tia Carrere is affordable!

[Dan Gould]

3 minutes ago, JSngry said:

That's not what surprised me. What surprised me was that there are a LOT of "celebrities" doing that Cameo thing. At $60 (payable in 4 interest-free installments!) , Tia Carrere is affordable!

I was thinking it was kind of sad, $60 a pop, paid in installments and split in some manner with this company. Not sure I want to know who else is on this thing.

[ejp626]

On 2021-02-25 at 10:56 AM, ejp626 said:

I realize it hasn't actually been approved by Canada or the US, but it should be almost any day now.  Please ship it over to Canada, as I am quite sure people here will take it.

AZ has just been approved by Canada, so if the Germans and French and Dutch are still wary of AZ, start sending it to us.  Much appreciated.

[Guy Berger]

4 hours ago, bresna said:

Unless they are a Palestinian living there...

I know this is dicey territory, but pedantically - my understanding is that Israelis of Palestinian/Arab ethnicity are getting vaccinated (they are Israeli citizens - though there may be inequity much like in the US with disadvantaged groups), Palestinians living in the occupied territories are not.  (Though there are certainly questions about the political arrangement that underpins that distinction.)

Moderators, feel free to delete this post if it is problematic.

Edited February 26, 2021 by Guy Berger

[JSngry]

19 minutes ago, Guy Berger said:

Moderators, feel free to delete this post if it is problematic.

The reality is, the post, if totally factual, is not.

[Big Beat Steve]

23 minutes ago, ejp626 said:

AZ has just been approved by Canada, so if the Germans and French and Dutch are still wary of AZ, start sending it to us.  Much appreciated.

Turn to the Swiss. It's them who have been reported as considering getting rid of their ordered AZ stocks "lock stock and barrel". 

[JSngry]

Nestle!

[Pim]

Well it was a matter of time of course, especially because both my wife and I are teachers. My wife got tested today and the result was positive. She got COVID. Only mild symptoms up till now fortunately. I’m pretty sure I will be contaminated as well as well.... she is my wife and we kissed and stuff... 

I will test myself tomorrow to be sure. I’m 30 years old and I workout 5 days a week: I am a fanatic CrossFit ‘athlethe’. But all of that doesn’t mean a thing of course. I think I will have enough time for my blog the coming days 

[Dub Modal]

3 minutes ago, Pim said:

Well it was a matter of time of course, especially because both my wife and I are teachers. My wife got tested today and the result was positive. She got COVID. Only mild symptoms up till now fortunately. I’m pretty sure I will be contaminated as well as well.... she is my wife and we kissed and stuff... 

I will test myself tomorrow to be sure. I’m 30 years old and I workout 5 days a week: I am a fanatic CrossFit ‘athlethe’. But all of that doesn’t mean a thing of course. I think I will have enough time for my blog the coming days 

Sorry to hear that. My best wishes to you and your wife. Hopefully it will be mild and y'all will get well quickly. 

[jazzbo]

Pim, I hope your wife gets well soon and that you don't contract a severe case.

My wife and I got our first Pfizer shots today, a "stadium" vaccination center that operated like a well-oiled machine, a breeze to get the vaccine. No ill after- or side-effects for either of us.

[JSngry]

Stay sane, Pim. and healthy!

[Rabshakeh]

Oh no. Wishing you a swift recovery!

[Pim]

Thank you guys, will keep you informed. Today my Woody Shaw cd ‘In the Beginning’ arrived. That will get me trough the first days I think

[Brad]

3 hours ago, Pim said:

Well it was a matter of time of course, especially because both my wife and I are teachers. My wife got tested today and the result was positive. She got COVID. Only mild symptoms up till now fortunately. I’m pretty sure I will be contaminated as well as well.... she is my wife and we kissed and stuff... 

I will test myself tomorrow to be sure. I’m 30 years old and I workout 5 days a week: I am a fanatic CrossFit ‘athlethe’. But all of that doesn’t mean a thing of course. I think I will have enough time for my blog the coming days 

Best wishes for a speedy recovery. 

[sidewinder]

Yeah - hang in there !

[mjazzg]

Hope you both come through it soon

[Pim]

Me own test got out negative... don’t know what to think of it. Was I the source of contamination more than a week a ago? Have I already had COVID and do I already have antibodies? 

[Dave Garrett]

1 hour ago, Pim said:

Me own test got out negative... don’t know what to think of it. Was I the source of contamination more than a week a ago? Have I already had COVID and do I already have antibodies? 

It can take several days to a week after exposure for the virus to incubate sufficiently to register a positive test result:

Evidence suggests that testing tends to be less accurate within three days of exposure, and the best time to get tested is five to seven days after you were exposed.

Here's hoping your wife recovers quickly and uneventfully, and that you only wind up with a mild case (assuming you haven't already had it).