Coronavirus news

[John_Hannah]

What I'm curious about--and I'm not sure any of you really know, but maybe--is who determines what vaccines get distributed to whom or where?

The Texas state health department has already published its priorities:

• Healthcare personnel likely to be exposed to or treat people with COVID-19.
• People at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19, including those with underlying medical conditions and people 65 years of age and older (Residents of long term care facilities are first on this list.)
• Other vulnerable, frontline workers

You have misread my question. Which of the three (or is it four now?) vaccines get given to whom, or distributed to where? I'm not asking what people get it first, I'm asking what vaccine they get.

Yeah, I was wondering about that also. Will I have a choice as to which "brand" I prefer?   

Peace, JOHN

[Weedon]

Can’t encourage giving a listen highly enough.  Wry long discussion of data.  https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/crucial-covid-update-ivor-cummins-is-hysteria-warranted/id1461771083?i=1000498907552

[Julio]

We have already been informed about possible side effects. They are minimal. None of them appear to be life threatening. And certainly the laws that require those long, warning  tag lines on TV commercials for various drugs will apply. I always find it amusing that a pill which is supposed to help us sleep has a side effect of making us drowsy. And that a pill which is supposed to combat depression may make some people who take it feel suicidal.

I hope that your take on side effects proves to be true.  However, leading doctors referenced by CNBC (a go-to trustworthy source of yours) disagree:
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/covid-vaccine-cdc-should-warn-people-the-side-effects-from-shots-wont-be-walk-in-the-park-.html

These people are starting to sound like anti-vaxxers.

Precisely the article linked to Here.

[Brian Stoffregen]

What I'm curious about--and I'm not sure any of you really know, but maybe--is who determines what vaccines get distributed to whom or where?

The Texas state health department has already published its priorities:

• Healthcare personnel likely to be exposed to or treat people with COVID-19.
• People at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19, including those with underlying medical conditions and people 65 years of age and older (Residents of long term care facilities are first on this list.)
• Other vulnerable, frontline workers

You have misread my question. Which of the three (or is it four now?) vaccines get given to whom, or distributed to where? I'm not asking what people get it first, I'm asking what vaccine they get.

Probably the first one available in their area. I don't plan to be picky. I know that I don't quiz my dr about who manufactured the flue shot that I receive.

[JEdwards]

What I'm curious about--and I'm not sure any of you really know, but maybe--is who determines what vaccines get distributed to whom or where? We actually have a guy in our church who is involved at a very high level in this whole vaccine thing, so maybe I can ask him if I get a chance. But I'm very curious about it. And yes, I'll absolutely be in line to take it, whichever "it" it might be.

My understanding is that the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) will make recommendations for the US in concert with the FDA approval process.  As they dig through the data, they may find evidence suggesting that vaccine A works best in patients with profile X, while vaccine B works best in patients with profile Y.  These will necessarily be tentative conclusions subject to revision as more data become available.  There may be geographic factors in play as well, given the more stringent storage requirements for the Pfizer vaccine and the distribution of providers capable of handling and storing it.

This web page at the CDC gives a very basic outline:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations-process.html

Peace,
Jon

[peter_speckhard]

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2020/11/23/the-covid-19-news-that-the-corporate-media-doesnt-publish-n1168514

The interesting thing in this rundown is the recurrence of more and more studies showing that asymptomatic spread isn't really much of a threat. Most policy, though, is predicated on the idea that everyone is a danger to everyone else.

[Voelker]

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2020/11/23/the-covid-19-news-that-the-corporate-media-doesnt-publish-n1168514

The interesting thing in this rundown is the recurrence of more and more studies showing that asymptomatic spread isn't really much of a threat. Most policy, though, is predicated on the idea that everyone is a danger to everyone else.

Given the preponderance of low-information voters who decided this past election, they may be on to something.

[Julio]

What I'm curious about--and I'm not sure any of you really know, but maybe--is who determines what vaccines get distributed to whom or where?

The Texas state health department has already published its priorities:

• Healthcare personnel likely to be exposed to or treat people with COVID-19.
• People at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19, including those with underlying medical conditions and people 65 years of age and older (Residents of long term care facilities are first on this list.)
• Other vulnerable, frontline workers

You have misread my question. Which of the three (or is it four now?) vaccines get given to whom, or distributed to where? I'm not asking what people get it first, I'm asking what vaccine they get.

Probably the first one available in their area. I don't plan to be picky. I know that I don't quiz my dr about who manufactured the flue shot that I receive.

They have also indicated that the Vaccine requiring the very cold storage would probably be for ‘institutional’ use ... there words ... not mind.

[Richard Johnson]

What I'm curious about--and I'm not sure any of you really know, but maybe--is who determines what vaccines get distributed to whom or where?

The Texas state health department has already published its priorities:

• Healthcare personnel likely to be exposed to or treat people with COVID-19.
• People at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19, including those with underlying medical conditions and people 65 years of age and older (Residents of long term care facilities are first on this list.)
• Other vulnerable, frontline workers

You have misread my question. Which of the three (or is it four now?) vaccines get given to whom, or distributed to where? I'm not asking what people get it first, I'm asking what vaccine they get.

Probably the first one available in their area. I don't plan to be picky. I know that I don't quiz my dr about who manufactured the flue shot that I receive.

We have a chimney sweep who takes care of our flue shot.

[JEdwards]

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2020/11/23/the-covid-19-news-that-the-corporate-media-doesnt-publish-n1168514

The interesting thing in this rundown is the recurrence of more and more studies showing that asymptomatic spread isn't really much of a threat. Most policy, though, is predicated on the idea that everyone is a danger to everyone else.

That’s because while there is an academic distinction to be made between truly asymptomatic transmission and prodromal, or “pre-symptomatic” transmission, the distinction is irrelevant to questions regarding the value of source control. It remains true that the infection appears frequently to be transmitted by individuals who have no symptoms at the time of transmission.  True, in the majority of such cases they will develop symptoms later, but you can’t very effectively ask people to start wearing a mask the day before yesterday.

Quarterbacks don’t usually throw a pass without backpedaling at least 3 steps, but the defensive coordinator’s decision whether to use a nickel defense has to be made before observing whether the QB drops back to pass.

[Julio]

UPS Will Make Dry Ice, Offer Freezers for Vaccine Distribution

United Parcel Service Inc. has set up its own dry ice production and will provide portable, super-cold freezers to its health care customers as the courier prepares for the massive roll out of vaccines against Covid-19.

UPS can make as much as 1,200 pounds (540 kilograms) of dry ice an hour near its Worldport air hub in Louisville, Kentucky, and can ship it the next day to U.S. and Canadian hospitals and clinics, according to a statement Tuesday. UPS will also source dry ice from third-party makers near air hubs in Dallas and Ontario, California.

Looks like the private sector logistics apparatus is all geared up to distribute the ultra cold China virus vaccine.

Are they doing this all on their own in anticipation of profits from the Vaccine distribution or is this investment courtesy of US taxpayers (and massive debt holders) through the CARES Act?

[jebutler]

Can the state mandate that I have to have fire detectors in my house? The state does that.
Can the state mandate that I am required to clear the snow off my walks and driveway? The state does that.
Can the state mandate that my children must be vaccinated before I send them to school? The state does that.
And as noted upstream, and certain emergency situation, the state is given additional authority to exercise temporary control over certain things.
So long as some people are so idiotic as to not wear the mask or follow the guidelines, these emergency actions are needed.

Speaking of idiotic people:

Democrat Mayor of Denver, Michael Hancock, sent out a tweet today, telling people to stay home, avoid travel, host virtual dinners, and only socialize with people you live with.

Within an hour, he was on a plane flying to spend Thanksgiving at his daughter's home in Mississippi.

I'm sure Brian will argue that the mayor is just following "other rules."

But now we see why people are rejecting being told what to do. The people making the rules see no reason to follow them, so the peons see no reason to follow them either.

[Richard Johnson]

Can the state mandate that I have to have fire detectors in my house? The state does that.
Can the state mandate that I am required to clear the snow off my walks and driveway? The state does that.
Can the state mandate that my children must be vaccinated before I send them to school? The state does that.
And as noted upstream, and certain emergency situation, the state is given additional authority to exercise temporary control over certain things.
So long as some people are so idiotic as to not wear the mask or follow the guidelines, these emergency actions are needed.

Speaking of idiotic people:

Democrat Mayor of Denver, Michael Hancock, sent out a tweet today, telling people to stay home, avoid travel, host virtual dinners, and only socialize with people you live with.

Within an hour, he was on a plane flying to spend Thanksgiving at his daughter's home in Mississippi.

I'm sure Brian will argue that the mayor is just following "other rules."

But now we see why people are rejecting being told what to do. The people making the rules see no reason to follow them, so the peons see no reason to follow them either.

There is indeed no shortage of hypocrisy on the Thanksgiving table.

[Dan Fienen]

FDA approval for one or more of the Covid-19 vaccines that have been developed are only days if not hours away. (As I write this, Monday, Nov. 30, morning.) One concern being expressed is whether people will actually get the vaccine. Estimates I've heard and read are as high as 40% of Americans would refuse to be vaccinated. Some of that may be the general distrust of some of vaccines. The anti-vaxxer movement has raised paranoia concerning vaccines, all vaccines and is a public health concern.


But there has been addition anti-vaccine sentiment raised against the Covid-19 vaccine that has been politically driven. This anti-vaccine meme was fostered by the general anti-Trump, "Orange man bad," meme. If Trump is involved, or if Trump is pushing it, whatever "it" is, it must be bad. Thus since Trump has pushed for the rapid development of the vaccine and desired the vaccine to be ready for use before the election (presumably to help his reelection prospects) the vaccines developed cannot be safe since obviously Trump short circuited the proper testing of the vaccines. Therefore we cannot trust them.


That has been simply playing politics with public health. Does anyone have any hard evidence that the testing of these vaccines has been substandard, or that they are being rushed to general use before they have been properly tested? If anything, the news reports on the testing has demonstrated that the proper caution and testing has been followed, at time delaying certain vaccines because a possible problem cropped up that needed to be further examined.


If Trump were to have used his power to push through the vaccines without adequate testing for political gain, he failed. Only now, nearly a month after election day are the vaccines up for approval. Even if he had tried to rush inadequately tested vaccines through, and please, could we see the evidence of that chicanery, it didn't work.


The vaccines up for approval are showing a better than 90% effectiveness. Those who are vaccinated will be generally safe from Covid-19 and for them the vaccination will be a success. But if the vaccines are to be effective in ending the pandemic and reducing Covid-19 to a seasonal annoyance like the flu, they will need to be generally used by a large percentage of the population. Distrust of the vaccines as an expression of dislike for Trump and anything he had anything to do with may prolong the pandemic even after he leaves office.

[Randy Bosch]

Here is one example of how weird things get - West Virginia where the state athletic commission has decided who won the championship football games that have not and will not be played based upon which finalist High School in each Division had the higher color-coded risk factor versus their opponent:

https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/11/28/wva-high-school-football-title-games-moved-due-to-covid-19/

I'm not an "expert" in this, but in my opinion they should have simply awarded co-championships for the year and put an asterisk after the titles.