Getting the latest Covid vaccination

[samhexum]

12 minutes ago, rvwnsd said:

Got the flu shot a couple weeks ago and am getting my COVID and RSV shots this afternoon. 

I got the RSV last year; is it a one-time thing?

[+ sync]

34 minutes ago, rvwnsd said:

My PCP's office sent an email reminding me to get my shots as did the Safeway pharmacy. Got the flu shot a couple weeks ago and am getting my COVID and RSV shots this afternoon. 

My cousin didn't get any vaccines until she was hospitalized for three weeks in a coma when she had COVID. She is now a proponent of vaccines.

I'm seeing my PCP Saturday for my PrEP follow-up and will ask what she thinks about the "don't get the shot" stance. 

I would appreciate your sharing your PCP's view(s).

[rvwnsd]

20 minutes ago, sync said:

I would appreciate your sharing your PCP's view(s).

Sure thing! I will report back after I see her on Saturday.

[rvwnsd]

3 hours ago, samhexum said:

I got the RSV last year; is it a one-time thing?

I am not sure. As they say in the pharmaceutical commercials, "ask YOUR doctor if the vaccine is right for YOU"

[+ robear]

14 hours ago, samhexum said:

I got the RSV last year; is it a one-time thing?

From the CDC website:  "Currently, CDC recommends only a single dose of RSV vaccine for all adults ages 75 and older and adults ages 60-74 with increased risk of severe RSV disease."

[marylander1940]

On 8/28/2024 at 6:15 PM, misterhumphries said:

I have gotten every Covid vaccination on offer and I plan to get the next one as soon as it's offered. I've had a mild case of Covid. Worst time in my life! The pity is people don't take it seriously any more.. it really is WORSE than the worst cold.

Me too!

To me health is a matter of personal and social responsibility!

I don't understand why some people trust science when it comes to PrEP allowing them to BB without risk but not on covid-19....

[SirBillybob]

On 9/1/2024 at 1:24 AM, Luv2play said:

The common cold does not leave a certain percentage experiencing it with dreadful symptoms such as chronic fatigue and brain fog as COVID does. 

If you had read me correctly you would realize that I was referring to the relevance of CoV pandemic incidence compared to the epidemiology of common cold incidence. 85% nucleocapsid seroconversion versus 100% cold occurrence (assuming most have had a lifetime cold virus) on a lifetime basis is not a morbidity comparison. By now, everybody is aware that COVID sequelae are unique. 

Edited September 16, 2024 by SirBillybob

[SirBillybob]

The Canadian delay is administrative, not regulatory. NACI underscored importance of timely adjudication this year due to unnecessary cases last year as a result of late rollout. There is no clinical reason for PHAC to lag on approval. They insist all old formulations be destroyed first due to drug identification numbers common coding and some provinces’ pharmacies refuse to go weeks with zero stock. A “top doc” said a few people will get sick due to the delay but it is a small minority. Smells like a stalemate. Also lack of clinical agreement on integrating products for respiratory illness season versus getting a jump on COVID that seems first out the gate re: incidence seasonally. It’s a cluster fcuk. It appears that they could clinically approve right now but don’t want to be criticized for delay in dose administration because organizing staffing and appointments etc means additional weeks. And then the same for flu, and so on. They are holding out for concomitant dosing various diseases and dicking around with the hope that one or more vaccines will be in the same syringe eventually. This year the USA FDA got it right. I will likely get a ride to Plattsburgh soon and pay for a shot. But then I am born in Canada and pay for most of my health care out of pocket including testing, MRIs, colonoscopy, lab work etc, because my province permits physicians to bill privately. 

Edited September 16, 2024 by SirBillybob

[Luv2play]

3 hours ago, SirBillybob said:

If you had read me correctly you would realize that I was referring to the relevance of CoV pandemic incidence compared to the epidemiology of common cold incidence. 85% nucleocapsid seroconversion versus 100% cold occurrence (assuming most have had a lifetime cold virus) on a lifetime basis is not a morbidity comparison. By now, everybody is aware that COVID sequelae are unique. 

Could you please speak in laymen’s terms. Your use of scientific lingo is impenetrable except to the scientists. Didn’t you learn that at school?

[+ sync]

On 9/12/2024 at 5:39 PM, rvwnsd said:

Sure thing! I will report back after I see her on Saturday.

I don't intend to be a nag, but I'm really curious to know if your PCP is yea or nay on the COVID vaccine(s).

One of my nieces is on staff at a hospital, not the medical staff, house services, and she told me that the hospital has discontinued the COVID shots being required for new employees and boosters for current employees.

I'm currently getting every COVID shot that becomes available, but these conflicting views are giving me pause.

Thanks for your time.

[SirBillybob]

1 hour ago, Luv2play said:

Could you please speak in laymen’s terms. Your use of scientific lingo is impenetrable except to the scientists. Didn’t you learn that at school?

I had merely indicated in a post (Aug 30) regarding the topic of who has ever had COVID that the assertion of having ever had COVID compared to the assertion of ever having had a cold was not the same considering there would be more additional time needed going forward to move the COVID dial from roughly 85% population lifetime incidence to closer to 100%. At that point the discussion would be moot, similar to the question of who has actually ever had the common cold. 

Your spontaneous response was that COVID for some people is worse in the long term compared to the common cold. While that is not untrue, I did not see the point of adding what is irrefutable but was unrelated to the discussion around assumptions of having ever had COVID. A shortfall of 10-15% of the population having yet been infected, that is escaped exposure, sheds no light on the clinical phenomenon of longstanding COVID health consequences, particularly as I add at the end here …

Happy now? 

But I can see after a two-week hiatus that the thread has meandered all over the place. Surprising.😉

… By the way, there are several reviews on “long COVID” that put its prevalence from 5% to 50%. They are termed meta-analysis reviews because they merge several actual surveillance studies in combination. In spite of meta-analyses being of higher scientific standard, it is obvious that consensus on what it is and how many have it is sorely lacking.

COVID conveniently explains the inexplicable in deteriorating health that could be, usually is, attributable to the less than fully explicable yet naturalistic. I will soon have a nuclear test for new onset cardiac symptoms. In 2019 I would never have mused about whether such symptoms were related to (confirmed) viral exposure or vaccination. Now who can help it, it’s all so front of mind. I am retired but there are likely a lot of folks unhappy with their employment that pursue secondary gain simply by presenting or believing in a clinical syndrome about which relatively little is known or agreed upon. It’s a bonanza for those that missed out on chronic fatigue syndrome because there is, in contrast, a true CoV pathogen and a remedy that mimics the pathogen. Hello disability claim, bye occupational drudgery.

Edited September 16, 2024 by SirBillybob

[Luv2play]

1 hour ago, SirBillybob said:

I had merely indicated in a post (Aug 30) regarding the topic of who has ever had COVID that the assertion of having ever had COVID compared to the assertion of ever having had a cold was not the same considering there would be more additional time needed going forward to move the COVID dial from roughly 85% population lifetime incidence to closer to 100%. At that point the discussion would be moot, similar to the question of who has actually ever had the common cold. 

Your spontaneous response was that COVID for some people is worse in the long term compared to the common cold. While that is not untrue, I did not see the point of adding what is irrefutable but was unrelated to the discussion around assumptions of having ever had COVID. A shortfall of 10-15% of the population having yet been infected, that is escaped exposure, sheds no light on the clinical phenomenon of longstanding COVID health consequences, particularly as I add at the end here …

Happy now? 

But I can see after a two-week hiatus that the thread has meandered all over the place. Surprising.😉

… By the way, there are several reviews on “long COVID” that put its prevalence from 5% to 50%. They are termed meta-analysis reviews because they merge several actual surveillance studies in combination. In spite of meta-analyses being of higher scientific standard, it is obvious that consensus on what it is and how many have it is sorely lacking.

COVID conveniently explains the inexplicable in deteriorating health that could be, usually is, attributable to the less than fully explicable yet naturalistic. I will soon have a nuclear test for new onset cardiac symptoms. In 2019 I would never have mused about whether such symptoms were related to (confirmed) viral exposure or vaccination. Now who can help it, it’s all so front of mind. I am retired but there are likely a lot of folks unhappy with their employment that pursue secondary gain simply by presenting or believing in a clinical syndrome about which relatively little is known or agreed upon. It’s a bonanza for those that missed out on chronic fatigue syndrome because there is, in contrast, a true CoV pathogen and a remedy that mimics the pathogen. Hello disability claim, bye occupational drudgery.

Now if you could only write like that all the time. 👍

[rvwnsd]

2 hours ago, sync said:

I don't intend to be a nag, but I'm really curious to know if your PCP is yea or nay on the COVID vaccine(s).

One of my nieces is on staff at a hospital, not the medical staff, house services, and she told me that the hospital has discontinued the COVID shots being required for new employees and boosters for current employees.

I'm currently getting every COVID shot that becomes available, but these conflicting views are giving me pause.

Thanks for your time.

My PCP disagrees with what your doctor said, unless you are a teenaged boy. (Her words, not mine). She went on to ask (facetiously, of course) if your doctor advises his patients to smoke as much as they want and call him if they have a cough or experience diminished lung capacity.

As for no longer requiring vaccinations and boosters, that's an HR and employee relations decision. My two former employers, who had vaccine mandates, no longer have them in place. My current client also rolled them back. 

If I was concerned about conflicting information, I'd seek a second opinion, contact my health plan's member health info hotline, and my county health department and inquire about vaccinations. I'd also find a different doctor.

[+ sync]

1 hour ago, rvwnsd said:

My PCP disagrees with what your doctor said, unless you are a teenaged boy. (Her words, not mine). She went on to ask (facetiously, of course) if your doctor advises his patients to smoke as much as they want and call him if they have a cough or experience diminished lung capacity.

As for no longer requiring vaccinations and boosters, that's an HR and employee relations decision. My two former employers, who had vaccine mandates, no longer have them in place. My current client also rolled them back. 

If I was concerned about conflicting information, I'd seek a second opinion, contact my health plan's member health info hotline, and my county health department and inquire about vaccinations. I'd also find a different doctor.

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback, and I can un derstand your PCP's view.

I'm still watchful.  I remember all the health agencies' approvals for thalidomide.

[+ nycman]

7 hours ago, Luv2play said:

Your use of scientific lingo is impenetrable except to the scientists

Don’t worry. We (scientists) don’t understand him either.

grin

[rvwnsd]

15 hours ago, sync said:

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback, and I can un derstand your PCP's view.

I'm still watchful.  I remember all the health agencies' approvals for thalidomide.

There's a good reason the US did not have thalidomide babies - the Food and Drug Administration never approved it for use during pregnancy. An FDA reviewer named Frances Kelsey refused to approve it. As it turned out, she was right. It was eventually approved in the US for use to treat certain cancers.

[+ nycman]

17 hours ago, sync said:

I'm still watchful.  I remember all the health agencies' approvals for thalidomide.

 

1 hour ago, rvwnsd said:

There's a good reason the US did not have thalidomide babies - the Food and Drug Administration never approved it for use during pregnancy. An FDA reviewer named Frances Kelsey refused to approve it.

Thank you!

You gotta know your HERstory, baby!

"(Frances) Oldham Kelsey was awarded the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service by President Kennedy in 1962 for not allowing thalidomide to be approved for sale in the US. She was also inducted into the National Women's Hall of Fame in 2000."

Fun fact, the vast majority of cases occurred in West Germany. The drug was never approved in East Germany. Even the communists knew thalidomide was bad news. 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide

More fun facts: I never knew Frances Oldham Kelsey was born Canadian and that she was only the second woman to receive the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Oldham_Kelsey

[+ sync]

58 minutes ago, nycman said:

 

Thank you!

You gotta know your HERstory, baby!

"(Frances) Oldham Kelsey was awarded the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service by President Kennedy in 1962 for not allowing thalidomide to be approved for sale in the US. She was also inducted into the National Women's Hall of Fame in 2000."

Fun fact, the vast majority of cases occurred in West Germany. The drug was never approved in East Germany. Even the communists knew thalidomide was bad news. 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide

More fun facts: I never knew Frances Oldham Kelsey was born Canadian and that she was only the second woman to receive the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Oldham_Kelsey

FYI:  

Thalidomide: the untold American story in “Wonder Drug”

HARVARDPUBLICHEALTH.ORG

---

Thalidomide affected thousands of babies in Europe. Jennifer Vanderbes' book "Wonder Drug" unveils how the drug did damage in the U.S., too.

 

[+ sync]

3 hours ago, rvwnsd said:

There's a good reason the US did not have thalidomide babies - the Food and Drug Administration never approved it for use during pregnancy. An FDA reviewer named Frances Kelsey refused to approve it. As it turned out, she was right. It was eventually approved in the US for use to treat certain cancers.

FYI:  

Thalidomide: the untold American story in “Wonder Drug”

HARVARDPUBLICHEALTH.ORG

---

Thalidomide affected thousands of babies in Europe. Jennifer Vanderbes' book "Wonder Drug" unveils how the drug did damage in the U.S., too.

 

[SoCalBaseball]

On 9/17/2024 at 3:24 AM, rvwnsd said:

There's a good reason the US did not have thalidomide babies - the Food and Drug Administration never approved it for use during pregnancy. An FDA reviewer named Frances Kelsey refused to approve it. As it turned out, she was right. It was eventually approved in the US for use to treat certain cancers.

Just one?! Saved by a thread

[misterhumphries]

On 9/12/2024 at 3:55 PM, samhexum said:

I got the RSV last year; is it a one-time thing?

From what I read, the RSV vaccine is every two years instead of annually. I wondered if I needed another RSV this year, too.

[samhexum]

On 9/12/2024 at 4:55 PM, samhexum said:

I got the RSV last year; is it a one-time thing?

 

On 9/12/2024 at 8:07 PM, rvwnsd said:

I am not sure. As they say in the pharmaceutical commercials, "ask YOUR doctor if the vaccine is right for YOU"

 

On 9/13/2024 at 7:52 AM, robear said:

From the CDC website:  "Currently, CDC recommends only a single dose of RSV vaccine for all adults ages 75 and older and adults ages 60-74 with increased risk of severe RSV disease."

 

57 minutes ago, misterhumphries said:

From what I read, the RSV vaccine is every two years instead of annually. I wondered if I needed another RSV this year, too.

It's a good thing we're all so clear on this!  I'm seeing my pulmonologist in November; I'll ask him then.

[SirBillybob]

On 9/16/2024 at 8:42 PM, nycman said:

Don’t worry. We (scientists) don’t understand him either.

grin

Armchairs are always in style.

[SirBillybob]

The divide between pro- and anti- vax ideology narrows with the ongoing slow-walked progression of elaboration regarding the potential toxicities of mRNA vaccine platforms and their novel delivery systems. A quick search will reveal that these papers are emerging from reputable sources peer-reviewed in reputable periodicals, and not foaming at the mouth regarding the atrocities of arbitrary vaccine admin. 

While genuine adverse events have not been dismissed for obvious reasons not the least of which is that rapidly produced vaccination slashed back morbidity and mortality as far back as initial vaccine research in which SARS-CoV infection was equivalent in vaxx and placebo sub-cohorts, their type, breadth, and the occurrence ratios by administration are criticized by some clinicians as being well beyond conventional thresholds for which regulatory bodies withhold authorization on other products.

Expansion of mRNA/LNPdelivery into other domains is sometimes met with early failure due to toxicity. That takes some of the shine off as well. The trend is that the naysaying regarding coronavirus vaccination remains based on some degree of evidentiary cherry-picking yet gradually departs from the realm of outright quackery. In this context, why would it be so unusual for a growing minority of physicians to question the validity of ongoing sequential (eg, seasonal) uptake? The vax skeptic crowd is getting more of what they need while devotees are prone to partial or complete turncoat rotation, are well over the honeymoon, cozying up to the protein subunit vaccine option that itself implies a ‘sommelier’ stance where the concept of toxicity evasion stands in for vintage preference, recognize the vast and growing quantity of mRNA individual or class action suits, or are getting behind the legitimate yet impractical suggestion that much more research be conducted on adverse event susceptibility factors that the Immunology field asserts is technically doable for eventually reducing primary and secondary mRNA platform adverse events by population denominator. 

Just go to another doctor? It’s likely that the next in line will promote the prevalent vaccine on hand. Nothing egregiously wrong with an overly simplistic suggestion in which a deleterious outcome specific to a single prophylaxis event is remote. The original physician is spared the anxiety of a possible clinical occurrence that remains quantifiably if not qualitatively less possible than the complication of coronavirus infection. His or her primary blunder was in not conceding legitimate uncertainty about the costs-benefits and not placing the decision conundrum squarely on the shoulders of the patient. That would be the reason for me to submit his/her walking papers. 

…

Time flies. I just hit 8 seasons since my last SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose. 

Edited September 22, 2024 by SirBillybob

[SirBillybob]

On 9/16/2024 at 3:31 PM, Luv2play said:

Now if you could only write like that all the time. 👍

Would that all writing were as consistent as frivolous whining.