you can bring a horse to water…
at least smackie came through for the team.
at least smackie came through for the team.
COVID-19 2020
Sorry that kind of humor/banter isn’t me
I've been saying for a while that Spring Break ain't happening but we might eke out Memorial Day Weekend. Maybe a tad optimistic….
hutch wrote:Don’t talk like that. Your attempts at humor are super shitty.
Sorry that kind of humor/banter isn’t me
Good stuff fellas, had my family checking in on me to make sure I was ok after all the snorting I did reading this thread
Maybe 2021 is going to be allllright.
Maybe 2021 is going to be allllright.
Justin wrote:
I've been saying for a while that Spring Break ain't happening but we might eke out Memorial Day Weekend. Maybe a tad optimistic….
A pre-covid Memorial Day weekend?
I think that is very very optimistic
https://www.wsj.com/articles/shape-shifting-virus-threatens-cycles-of-illness-lockdowns-11611752410
Johnson and Johnson 66% effective overall.
So do i get the Johnson and Johnson as soon as possible, or wait to get the Moderna or Pfizer, assuming J&J will be quicker and easier to get?
I guess that's a question for my doctor when i get my physical in a couple of weeks.
So do i get the Johnson and Johnson as soon as possible, or wait to get the Moderna or Pfizer, assuming J&J will be quicker and easier to get?
I guess that's a question for my doctor when i get my physical in a couple of weeks.
Space wrote:Why are you assuming you would have access to the J&J quicker than the Moderna or Pfizer ones?
So do i get the Johnson and Johnson as soon as possible, or wait to get the Moderna or Pfizer, assuming J&J will be quicker and easier to get?
I definitely think I would want M/P over J&J all things being equal but if the scenario exists where its J&J now or M/P 3 months from now, that's an interesting hypothetical and risk analysis question. Probably also depends on if you are a person who is more likely to get super sick/die from COVID over baseline (which I do not believe to be the case for you personally but I am not your physician).
I guess there's also a Julian's America grotesquerie to consider of if the J&J vaccine works in a different way than the similarly-functioning M/P ones, do people with means and access get both and if so, when is the acceptable time in our national rollout to do so?
Julian, wrote:Space wrote:Why are you assuming you would have access to the J&J quicker than the Moderna or Pfizer ones?
So do i get the Johnson and Johnson as soon as possible, or wait to get the Moderna or Pfizer, assuming J&J will be quicker and easier to get?
I definitely think I would want M/P over J&J all things being equal but if the scenario exists where its J&J now or M/P 3 months from now, that's an interesting hypothetical and risk analysis question. Probably also depends on if you are a person who is more likely to get super sick/die from COVID over baseline (which I do not believe to be the case for you personally but I am not your physician).
I guess there's also a Julian's America grotesquerie to consider of if the J&J vaccine works in a different way than the similarly-functioning M/P ones, do people with means and access get both and if so, when is the acceptable time in our national rollout to do so?
The Johnson and Johnson has less storage issues than the Pfizer, and only takes one shot whereas the other two require two shots. So if they made equal amounts, twice as many people would get the Johnson and Johnson.
Yes, I am imagining a totally hypothetical situation where J&J would be more quickly available. But I wonder if there will be any guidelines in regard to to should get what based on how quickly one is available combined with possible differences in efficacy.
It seems like lower risk people should get J&J and higher risk should get one of the other two. But how many people to put in the low risk bucket compared to the high risk bucket is interesting.
I see my overweight, middle aged self and my wife's overweight, middle aged self as being low to moderate, and my possibly slightly overweight teenager as being low risk.
Space wrote:Oh true, but aren't we likely looking at late February before it rolls out, and then we really don't know what sort of manufacturing ability J&J/AZ is going to have one day 1. Are they ready to ship 10,000,000 doses? Are they ready to ship 100,000,000? I just don't think its a given that a general population person like yourself is going to necessarily be able to get the J&J vax before one of the two-dose models at this specific moment in time.
The Johnson and Johnson has less storage issues than the Pfizer, and only takes one shot whereas the other two require two shots. So if they made equal amounts, twice as many people would get the Johnson and Johnson.
Space wrote: But I wonder if there will be any guidelines in regard to to should get what based on how quickly one is available combined with possible differences in efficacy.This is actually a really interesting policy question and I agree with you that the CDC should put out some guidelines.
It seems like lower risk people should get J&J and higher risk should get one of the other two. But how many people to put in the low risk bucket compared to the high risk bucket is interesting.
Will they call it a Long Island Iced Tea if you get all three?
Jewish wrote:One dose of Moderna and one of Pfizer is a Covid Palmer.
Will they call it a Long Island Iced Tea if you get all three?
Julian, wrote:Jewish wrote:One dose of Moderna and one of Pfizer is a Covid Palmer.
Will they call it a Long Island Iced Tea if you get all three?
duh…where have you been, that joke has been around for decades…wait how long have we been on lockdown?!
Space wrote:
Johnson and Johnson 66% effective overall.
Not super stoked about J&J vaccine either, however, the 66% efficacy is world wide. It's actually higher in the US (closer to 75%, but still lower than Moderna/AstraZeneca/Pfizer). The main problem is that it was tested in South Africa and is struggling against their new variant….
could you imagine if we did this back in March/April…(but 'mericin fredums!)
https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/israel-could-demand-returning-israelis-wear-electronic-bracelets-657184
will be used in the following way: Israelis landing at the airport will be taken to a COVID-19 hotel, after getting one negative COVID-19 result they will be allowed to return to their homes if they agree to wear such a bracelet, the report claimed.
https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/israel-could-demand-returning-israelis-wear-electronic-bracelets-657184
will be used in the following way: Israelis landing at the airport will be taken to a COVID-19 hotel, after getting one negative COVID-19 result they will be allowed to return to their homes if they agree to wear such a bracelet, the report claimed.
Y'all are focusing on the wrong numbers re J&J
Yes, its "only" 72% (in US) and likely decreasing but that only seems bad compared to the blockbuster results of Pfizer and Moderna.
Furthermore the J&J vaccine decreases the likelihood of severe COVID but 85% and death from COVID by 100% after 28 days.
Shoot it into my veins now please.
The number you should all be FAR more worried about is the fact that they will only have 7 million (and possibly as few as 3 million) doses available upon approval in later Feb
Yes, its "only" 72% (in US) and likely decreasing but that only seems bad compared to the blockbuster results of Pfizer and Moderna.
Furthermore the J&J vaccine decreases the likelihood of severe COVID but 85% and death from COVID by 100% after 28 days.
Shoot it into my veins now please.
The number you should all be FAR more worried about is the fact that they will only have 7 million (and possibly as few as 3 million) doses available upon approval in later Feb
reports the Pentagon and FEMA are negotiating the final terms of an agreement that could see the military provide around 450,000 Covid-19 vaccinations a day. Some 10,000 troops would be deployed at 100 vaccination centers across the U.S.
brennser wrote:
Y'all are focusing on the wrong numbers re J&J
Thanks for the clarity. Good to have you back
brennser wrote:
Y'all are focusing on the wrong numbers re J&J
Yes, its "only" 72% (in US) and likely decreasing but that only seems bad compared to the blockbuster results of Pfizer and Moderna.
Furthermore the J&J vaccine decreases the likelihood of severe COVID but 85% and death from COVID by 100% after 28 days.
Shoot it into my veins now please.
The number you should all be FAR more worried about is the fact that they will only have 7 million (and possibly as few as 3 million) doses available upon approval in later Feb
